[GNC] Order of transactions

[Derek Atkins]

Adrien Monteleone <adrien.monteleone at lusfiber.net> writes:

> Yes, that is why I was explaining the abuse of the NUM field as a time
> field for sorting and how to do it in a way that works. If you are
> doing this, (or instead using 1,2,3,4 ) *and* you want to keep track
> of a transaction number, then you’ll have to put it somewhere else so
> you can still sort that transaction in the order you want. One obvious
> choice for an alternative would be the Action field for that
> particular split line. Another would be the Note field. (especially if
> the Action field is also otherwise utilized) Another option would be
> the Memo field for the split.

Yes, if you want to order your transactions in a specific order but then
also be able to sort by a transaction number then yes, you would need to
do what you suggest and put the default-sort-order into Num, and the
transaction number into another field.

But why would you want to do that?

You could still SEARCH for transaction number even if you overload num
with <sortNum>.<TxnNum>.  But yes, you couldn't sort on the <TxnNum>
portion -- I just don't see the use case for that.

*shrugs*

> Regards,
> Adrien

> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek at ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant