RFC: timedot changes

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Simon Michael

unread,
May 2, 2023, 11:42:44 PMMay 2
to hledger
G'day all. Any fellow timedot users out there ?

I'm fixing/improving timedot's description/comment/tag parsing. But before that..
which do you think is better:

1. generating little transactions for each line, as we do now:

2023-01-01
a ....
b ....
c ....

->

2023-01-01
(a) 1

2023-01-01
(b) 1

2023-01-01
(c) 1

Or 2. generating one big transaction per date line ?

2023-01-01
(a) 1
(b) 1
(c) 1

I don't remember why it's implemented as 1. Right now, 2 looks a little tidier ?
It would be a breaking change (print and register reports would change;
balance reports would not).

The above affects how timedot format can support descriptions and comments (and tags).
Variant 2 would simplify that design space a bit: date lines can end with a transaction
description and comment, time lines can end with a posting comment.

Simon Michael (sm)

unread,
May 3, 2023, 1:29:24 AMMay 3
to hledger
A change to 2 is looking good to me: https://github.com/simonmichael/hledger/pull/2030
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages