Transaction register question

[Geert Janssens]

Hi Robert,

I have moved this thread to gnucash-devel as discussion on the beta 
version of GnuCash should not go on the gnucash-user list. Please follow 
up on gnucash-devel as well. Thanks.

See below for some replies.

On 17-08-13 14:29, Robert Kesterson wrote:
> Geert Janssens wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> From your message I couldn't derive your motivation for downloading 
>> and installing the beta version of GnuCash. If you didn't download it 
>> to *experiment* with the new features or to do some beta testing, you 
>> are probably better of reverting to the latest stable version, which 
>> currently is 2.4.13.
>
> Hi, Geert and thanks for the info.  I was able to find the menu option 
> open the accounts in the old register format.  I wish it would "stick" 
> so I didn't have to do that every time I want to open it (though I did 
> discover by that jumping to a transaction in a register opens it in 
> the same style interface as the account you currently have open, or at 
> least it seems to, so that's good).
>
As John already mentioned, it doesn't "stick" because it will go away 
completely soon. The register 2 code is not ready yet, but beta is meant 
to test and improve this code before 2.6. So there's no point in 
promoting the old register code.
> To answer your unstated question, the reason I run the beta version is 
> twofold.  Number one, it is updated far more often than the stable 
> version (yes, I know that's why they call it "stable"). And number 
> two, I actually *am* looking for improvements in the user interface, 
> among others.   As I mentioned, I run Gnucash on a Mac.  It doesn't 
> really look right on a Mac.  For that matter, it doesn't really look 
> right on Windows either.  The GUI looks OK on Linux because it matches 
> the look and feel of other applications. On Windows and Mac, it 
> doesn't fit in with the rest of the platform.  (Bear in mind, I've 
> used GnuCash for *years*, including at least a year on each of the 
> three platforms I mention, so my opinion is not based on a cursory 
> observation.  I don't use all the business or online features that are 
> available, but I do use the general recording and reporting functions 
> quite a lot.)
I'm always open for good feedback in GUI improvements. Again John 
already explained why the GUI looks as it does. The GUI framework we use 
is Gtk, which is a very linux oriented framework. There have been 
discussions in the past to switch to something else, but we simply lack 
manpower to do that anytime soon.

Note that on Windows you have the option to use different skins 
("themes" as they are called). Some of these skins look more Windows like.
>
>> Assuming you are testing the beta, here is some background on the 
>> double scrollbar. It has been introduced to work around a performance 
>> problem in the new register interface. It is still under discussion 
>> whether the improvement in performance is enough to justify the added 
>> complexity. It may be reverted to a single scrollbar interface again, 
>> provided another solution can be found to fix the performance.
> I guess I don't have large enough registers for the performance to be 
> an issue.  But then I only have about three years worth of 
> transactions in GnuCash at the moment.  But I do itemize and split 
> every transaction, so it's a fair amount of data (a  bit over 6 MB in 
> a SQLite database at the moment).  Previously, I had ten years worth 
> of data in it, and still don't recall any performance issues.  I'm a 
> developer myself, and I do tend to use machines with plenty of memory 
> and processing power, so maybe I just don't notice?
You won't notice the performance issue anyway if you use the old 
register. It's only apparent in the new register and before 2.5.4. And 
the new register in 2.5.4 doesn't have the performance issue any more 
either due to changes in how the register is populated. A side effect of 
these changes is the double scroll bar, which I expect to go away again 
in a future release.
>
> If the bottleneck has anything to do with the amount of data loaded, 
> I'd look at changing from loading the entire database into memory vs 
> using a database back end.  I'm sure that has already been discussed 
> to death and I know there are reasons for the current paradigm, so I'm 
> fine with leaving it at that. But the new register interface still 
> needs work to be as usable as the old one.
The entire database into memory vs using a database backend is also 
something on the roadmap (albeit longer term, not for 2.6). It will 
improve the program load time as a whole. But it doesn't change anything 
in the performance problem with the register. The problem there is not 
the access to the data, but how the GtkTreeView widget handles 
presenting this on-screen. By the time the register needs access to the 
data, this data is already fully in memory, which means it's even faster 
accessible than via a database backend. I've written about this some 
more in another mail to gnucash-devel a couple of minutes ago.
>
> I know it's open source and I could actually contribute, but I simply 
> have too many irons in the fire already.   In the interest of actually 
> doing something useful, maybe I could offer some constructive 
> observations about the new interface?  I would assume you're already 
> aware of them, but just in case, here's what I've observed:
>
Your observations are surely welcome. I don't expect you to write code 
to fix these issues to give feedback. It would have been nice of course, 
but we all have only 24hours in a day.

I would consider it a contribution as well though if you reported your 
observations in our bug tracker (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Bugzilla). 
Observations on the mailing list tend to get lost. In bugzilla they will 
stick until someone finds the time to evaluate the them. Also having one 
place to gather these issues makes it easier to create a larger picture 
of some problem.
> 1. I don't care for the dual scrollbars, but that may be just personal 
> taste.  As others have said, GnuCash seems to be the only one doing 
> that.  Maybe that makes it odd, maybe that makes it innovative.  I'm 
> not sure.
>
> 2.  In the old interface, as I start typing a payee, autocomplete 
> happens "in place", so I can hit tab and I'm ready to fill in the 
> amount, with the complete payee and the target account already 
> populated and the input focus already on the amount.   In the new 
> register, autocomplete happens in a popup below the field, and hitting 
> tab just moves my focus without selecting anything.  I have to first 
> hit the down arrow to focus the list and select the item.  It would be 
> nice if it would automatically keep the top match selected as I type 
> so I could just hit tab and go on.
I'd consider this a bug, or at least a regression of functionality. 
Worth reporting, thank you.
>
> 2a.  If I do hit the down arrow to select the first autocomplete and 
> then hit tab, it fills in the most recent target account and amount, 
> but doesn't move my input focus to the amount.  In fact, visibly, it 
> doesn't indicate my input focus at all.  It's actually still in the 
> payee field, but the whole row is highlighted and it's not at all 
> obvious where the focus is.  If I hit tab a second time, I find myself 
> in the target account column, then I have to tab two or three more 
> times to get to the amount.   The added keystrokes and the uncertainty 
> of where my focus is make it harder to use the new register.
>
Same here.
> 2b. Once I have entered the transaction in the new register, I hit 
> return, expecting it to save the transaction and move to a new 
> transaction line.  Instead, it just highlights the whole line and 
> hides my input focus (which is actually still in the amount column).  
> To make it actually save the transaction, I have to use the arrow keys 
> to move to another transaction, at which point it will pop up a dialog 
> asking me if I want to save the transaction. I know I could turn on 
> the "remember and don't ask me again" option, but in the old register, 
> I generally did not move off a transaction until I was done with it, 
> so in the vast majority of cases, the answer to that dialog would have 
> been either "cancel" or "discard changes".  Setting it to 
> automatically save the changes without asking would likely cause more 
> problems than it would solve, at least in my case.
>
And same here.
> Lest I be thought a complainer who might be better off with a "pretty 
> face" accounting program, let me also say that I have tried a number 
> of different personal finance programs over time, and there's a reason 
> I've stuck with Gnucash.  Despite my quibbles, it is a very solid 
> program and the double entry approach is really good, and will point 
> out errors that more "simplified" accounting programs would just sweep 
> under the rug.  I really like it and recommend it.  I may gripe about 
> it needing improvement, but those gripes only exist because I'm 
> actually using it, and think that a great program could be made even 
> better.
>
As said before I welcome feedback. But it's nice to hear you're a real 
long-time user as well :)

Geert