Vanishing transactions and log file

[Derek Atkins]

"Donald Allen" <donaldcallen at gmail.com> writes:

> Thinking about this some more, one *could* imagine the atomic particle
> of the basic register being a transaction, not a split. Then, in a
> case like this, you would see one entry, not two. I think for most
> people (myself initially, and probably for Ross) this would be less
> confusing. But it would also be less informative, as I mentioned in my
> previous message, because without expanding the splits, you would not
> know that there were two splits involving the account (for which
> you've displayed the basic register). I prefer it as it is, having
> figured it out after my first "what's this?" reaction and come to
> realize that it makes sense.

True, one COULD imagine this, but then you have a problem.  When
displaying/editing the split-specific data, which split's data do you
show/edit?  Yes, it might sound nice to be able to combine the values
into a single line, but what do you do if you try to change the
number?  See, there are MANY reasons GnuCash does it the way it does.
:)

> /Don

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available