[GNC-dev] New balsheet (and P&L report), API considerations, and (slow?) KVP in Account.cpp

[Christopher Lam]

Forgot to include a screenshot to illustrate

https://screenshots.firefox.com/Z7HOv5pb2qbRc5NP/null

- recursive balance vs. multilevel (and saner alignment of numbers)
- common-currency vs. original currency (notice better handling of 
missing USD/GBP prices than balance-sheet.scm)
- for this illustration periodic columns have been disabled

C


On 04/07/18 20:13, Christopher Lam wrote:
>
> I've restored multilevel-subtotals... using an easier tack than 
> previously: instead of keeping lists(1 per account-depth) of lists (1 
> per column) of collectors, it'll just climb up the hierarchy and print 
> parent acc's balance+children until the next account-depth is reached.
>
> Please help beta test!
>
> I've made some cosmetic changes too. eg dates in their own row, 
> double-underline for grand-total only.
>
> I do not think it'll be wise to reduce font sizes for account-depth.
>
> Still remaining:
>
> - fix negative signs strategy
>
>
> On 03/07/18 16:17, Christopher Lam wrote:
>> Broadly yes, one approach is that parent accounts always show totals 
>> for themselves+children, the other approach is the totals appear 
>> after each parent+children.
>>
>> Same information presented in 2 different ways.
>>
>> The difference is that the recursive subtotals are easier.... When 
>> reaching an account, it just queries if it has children, and if yes 
>> check if they have own amount, and if yes insert next line for own 
>> account.
>>
>> Multilevel subtotals require collectors to keeping track of amounts 
>> while cycling the account list.
>>
>> On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 15:41 Geert Janssens <geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be 
>> <mailto:geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be>> wrote:
>>
>>     Op dinsdag 3 juli 2018 02:57:50 CEST schreef Christopher Lam:
>>     > Hi Stephen, Dave &al
>>     >
>>     > Thank you -
>>     >
>>     > Dave - the changes are merely cosmetic therefore easy.
>>     >
>>     > It sounds there are still 2 desired presentational types - (1)
>>     Dave's
>>     > approach = *recursive-bal* - 'parent' accounts generally
>>     collect their
>>     > children account amounts; if they also have their own amount,
>>     the latter is
>>     > rendered on the next line, indented as a child account. (2)
>>     Stephen's
>>     > approach = *multilevel-bal* - parent accounts' amounts are
>>     hidden unless
>>     > they exist.
>>     >
>>     I'm not sure I understand the difference here. Isn't this
>>     expressing the same
>>     thing twice in different ways ? Perhaps I'm missing a subtlety in
>>     the English
>>     language...
>>
>>     Or is the difference whether the totals are shown above or below
>>     the children
>>     ?
>>
>>     Geert
>>
>>
>