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

[Christopher Lam]

Still at 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/christopherlam/gnucash/maint-balsheet-pnl/gnucash/report/standard-reports/balsheet-pnl.scm

Latest - removed accountname formatting in recursive-bal. Now they are 
styled normally but the amounts are bold/bigger if they contain 
children-amounts.

https://screenshots.firefox.com/NcMKts75npXbP4Bc/null

C

On 05/07/18 03:40, Stephen M. Butler wrote:
> Could you repost the location to pull the latest?  My memory is
> over-full and appears to be working the LIFO method of cleanup.
>
>
> On 07/04/2018 05:13 AM, 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
>>>
>>>