Advanced Portfolio

Andrew Sackville-West ajswest at
Thu Dec 21 16:06:28 EST 2006

On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 03:49:14PM -0500, Henry M. Benson wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >hi, 
> Hi, and thanks for the response!
> >i did a bunch of work on the advanced report portfolio, about a year
> >ago and as a result, fixed some broken stuff and introduced many
> >broken things :(.
> LOL - understood :-(
> >I don't have a lot of time to devote, but would be happy to help in
> >whatever way I can. My biggest issue was I ended up working on things
> >I didn't really understand. My original goal was to implement some
> >display settings for a user who requested it. I ended up trying to fix
> >some other broken behavior in the report (some of which succeeded, I
> >think), but left other parts of it undone. The biggest issue I think,
> >is that I tried to implement a way of really tracking gains based on
> >three different models - FIFO, FILO and average price (i think). I did
> >not however, handle all the possible methods that the value of shares
> >could change (splits, reinvestments, etc) resulting in bad results for
> >any but the simplest cases. 
> Yes, that's what I'm seeing.  I have a rather complicated portfolio with
> all of these - it'll make a great test case.  If it's any consolation,
> Quicken gets it wrong too...


> >There were also some difficulties in
> >getting reliable data because we couldn't force users to make pricedb
> >entries. I think I got that more or less handled by using register
> >data when pricedb data wasn't available. 
> I think that's working properly.
> >The report itself, is really pretty simple (IIRC) and I'm happy to
> >pitch in a bit. Have you looked over the code yet? and are you
> >familiar with scheme/lisp? 
> I looked over the code and can follow the basic flow.  I have some
> lisp experience from my MIT days, a disturbingly large number of years
> ago.  :-)  I'll give it a try and see how it goes.

i find it amazingly inuitive, unlike my recent games with python.

> >I think if we could get a really good set a
> >requirements for how the report handles particular cases, it could be
> >shaped up fairly easily. I'll checkout a new tree here in the next
> >couple days and take a look myself.
> >
> >A
> Yes, I agree, requirements would be a great place to start.  I'd be
> glad to start on that.  I can also make note of what I've seen, review
> the open bugs, and note what works and what doesn't.  I can probably
> get to that next week sometime.  How does that sound?

great. I'll get my local repo up to date and review it all over the
next couple days. as I said before, I don't have a *lot* of time, but

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : 

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list