2021-03-04 GnuCash IRC logs
00:19:10 *** bertbob has quit IRC
00:24:36 *** bertbob has joined #gnucash
00:24:36 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v bertbob
00:55:20 *** alt_mikee has joined #gnucash
00:56:08 *** mikee has quit IRC
01:13:44 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
01:21:32 *** sbluhm has joined #gnucash
01:21:32 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v sbluhm
01:42:31 *** fell has quit IRC
01:43:50 *** fell has joined #gnucash
01:43:50 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o fell
01:54:35 *** suukim has joined #gnucash
01:57:04 *** frakturfreak has quit IRC
01:57:08 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
01:58:47 *** jw4 has quit IRC
01:59:17 *** jw4 has joined #gnucash
02:09:27 *** Aussie_matt has quit IRC
02:10:48 *** frakturfreak has joined #gnucash
02:10:48 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v frakturfreak
02:21:07 *** gjanssens has joined #gnucash
02:21:08 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o gjanssens
02:36:15 *** lxop has quit IRC
02:54:36 *** suukim has quit IRC
03:15:08 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
03:17:10 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
03:17:27 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
03:20:03 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
03:21:56 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
03:23:46 *** weego has joined #gnucash
03:32:06 *** CDB-PHONE_ has quit IRC
03:32:09 *** CDB-PHONE_ has joined #gnucash
03:32:21 *** CDB-PHONE_ has joined #gnucash
03:43:25 <gjanssens> .
04:09:47 *** bertbob has quit IRC
04:15:08 *** bertbob has joined #gnucash
04:15:08 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v bertbob
04:22:34 *** jervin has quit IRC
04:39:01 *** storyjesse has quit IRC
05:11:52 * chris has checked all sscanf are called with short strings (<= 10 chars)
05:14:20 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
05:15:37 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
05:28:21 *** alt_mikee has quit IRC
05:31:02 *** mikee has joined #gnucash
05:55:22 *** User__ has joined #gnucash
06:43:38 *** Aussie_matt has joined #gnucash
06:48:19 *** field^Mop has joined #gnucash
07:30:47 *** storyjesse has joined #gnucash
07:41:41 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
08:50:03 *** Jimraehl1 has joined #gnucash
08:50:46 *** Jimraehl1 has quit IRC
09:05:21 *** Agfarmer18 has joined #gnucash
09:06:26 *** Aussie_matt has quit IRC
09:11:48 *** sbluhm has quit IRC
09:11:51 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
09:17:49 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
09:18:19 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
09:39:59 *** Agfarmer18 has quit IRC
10:20:09 *** mydogsnameisrudy has joined #gnucash
10:20:41 *** mydogsnameisrudy has quit IRC
10:32:57 *** halipaul has joined #gnucash
10:46:05 *** sbluhm has joined #gnucash
10:46:05 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v sbluhm
10:51:07 *** halipaul has quit IRC
10:55:27 *** o01eg has quit IRC
10:56:42 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
11:08:35 *** guak has joined #gnucash
11:13:50 *** sbluhm has quit IRC
11:20:09 *** jcarl43 has joined #gnucash
11:20:10 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v jcarl43
11:20:51 *** ArtGravity has joined #gnucash
11:20:52 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v ArtGravity
11:25:48 *** suukim has joined #gnucash
11:45:09 *** sbluhm has joined #gnucash
11:53:48 *** suukim has quit IRC
11:54:45 *** suukim has joined #gnucash
11:56:34 <noregret> I split the martgage paymnt between principal and interest, does that sound right? also, the total mortgage amount should be a decrease, right?
12:02:38 *** bindash has joined #gnucash
12:06:18 *** storyjesse has quit IRC
12:08:39 <warlord> total payment is usually constant, the P/I split changes over time.
12:19:41 *** jervin has joined #gnucash
12:19:42 <noregret> correct, so what i'm doing is correct?
12:20:20 <noregret> because when I go to the loan account, I see the payments as decrease, shouldn't they be an increase?
12:22:59 *** Mechtilde has joined #gnucash
12:25:38 *** sbluhm has quit IRC
12:37:45 *** angel has joined #gnucash
12:54:33 *** angel has quit IRC
13:02:46 *** sbluhm has joined #gnucash
13:02:46 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v sbluhm
13:17:25 *** bindash has quit IRC
13:24:30 *** sbluhm has quit IRC
13:30:50 *** suukim has quit IRC
13:49:36 *** frakturfreak has quit IRC
13:59:08 *** jervin has quit IRC
13:59:09 *** jervin has joined #gnucash
13:59:40 *** jervin has quit IRC
13:59:40 *** jervin1 has joined #gnucash
14:02:40 *** jervin1 has quit IRC
14:02:46 *** sbluhm has joined #gnucash
14:02:46 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v sbluhm
14:06:02 *** frakturfreak has joined #gnucash
14:20:25 *** Hamaryns has joined #gnucash
14:20:25 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Hamaryns
14:28:57 *** gjanssens has quit IRC
14:29:54 *** jervin has joined #gnucash
14:52:37 *** jervin has quit IRC
14:52:46 *** jervin has joined #gnucash
15:05:46 *** o01eg has joined #gnucash
15:18:13 <jralls> chris, you're not going to get any user testing from pull requests. Users need something that they can install and they need a way to install and test that won't mess up their production book. That's a pretty tall order.
15:22:16 *** sbluhm has quit IRC
15:26:45 <jralls> chris, ISTM they both turned out to be more complicated than you thought they would be when you started. That happens a lot in GnuCash because of the years of feature growth with no overall plan, poor organization, and poor execution.
15:28:16 <jralls> chris, what's the sscanf comment about?
16:03:20 *** Mechtilde has quit IRC
16:14:20 *** Hamaryns has quit IRC
16:14:21 *** Hamaryns has joined #gnucash
16:14:21 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Hamaryns
16:14:43 *** bindash has joined #gnucash
16:15:07 *** Hamaryns has quit IRC
16:17:57 *** bindash has quit IRC
16:57:19 *** field^Mop has quit IRC
17:05:06 *** frakturfreak has quit IRC
17:15:09 <chris> jralls re:sscanf https://nee.lv/2021/02/28/How-I-cut-GTA-Online-loading-times-by-70/
17:15:51 *** Aussie_matt has joined #gnucash
17:17:33 <chris> jralls: I agree no user testing at all, hence seeking your views whether (1) PRs are adequate (2) how much back/fwd compatibility code needs to exist.
17:17:43 <jralls> Um, OK. Do you actually have profile data that you think points to GC's use of sscanf as a problem?
17:18:32 <chris> sscanf: I checked and sscanf always called with short strings hence it's not a slowdown at all
17:18:49 *** frakturfreak has joined #gnucash
17:18:49 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v frakturfreak
17:19:50 <jralls> Right. But what led you to check?
17:20:10 <chris> oh just a hypothesis I wanted to verify
17:20:21 <chris> re: budget-conversion: from my POV the PR is near-complete -- I'd replaced all budget sign reversal from the *editor* to the *viewer*
17:21:00 <jralls> An hypothesis requires evidence. You get evidence for that sort of thing from profiling, as the author of that blog post did.
17:21:58 <chris> but my view is to enforce conversion, cf gjanssens's view to offer optional conversion makes things much more complicated
17:23:20 <jralls> Ah, right, I remember that rabbit hole. Optional features make it possible to create a book that can't be opened in a future release.
17:23:46 <chris> s/future/older
17:29:19 *** jervin has quit IRC
17:31:52 <chris> fwiw the 'unreversed-budgets' featured books *can* be opened in gnucash from 3.8 onwards iirc
17:33:50 <jralls> Is "unreversed-budgets" the same as "scrubbed for sign-reversal weirdness"?
17:35:54 <chris> Yes; this PR will scrub and set the feature.
17:40:01 <jralls> OK. Did you implement checking for budgets at startup as you suggested just before your last force push?
17:41:22 <jralls> Is this scrub any riskier than the ones already in place in terms of breaking someone's book? You don't have any unit tests...
17:42:11 <jralls> I'm thinking of gjanssens's concern that something might go wrong halfway through and wreck a SQL user's book with no backup available.
17:43:00 <chris> (not sure how it'd crash halfway- The scrub is C only and rather simple)
17:43:09 <chris> it's triggered in gnc-file.c
17:46:10 <jralls> The usual way to crash is to attempt to dereference a nullptr or access freed memory.
17:54:38 <warlord> noregret, no, payment to a loan decreases the loan amount.
17:54:57 <warlord> you owe $1000. You pay $100. Now you owe $900.
17:58:03 <noregret> warlord: what avout the original loan amount, is it a decrease or increase? it's confusing me
17:58:18 <jralls> chris, The code needs work. I'll try to find time to comment the PR with what needs changing.
17:59:08 <warlord> original loan amount is a credit to loan (and would debit, e.g., an asset).
17:59:18 <warlord> So it would "increase" the loan amount.
18:01:18 <chris> jralls: thanks. FWIW the later commits [enforce-unreversed] are all about removing the optional scrub IIRC
18:01:53 <chris> noregret: consider a loan is a NEGATIVE to your networth. paying the loan will increase the amount, i.e. approach zero.
18:02:10 <chris> if you set the global preference sign-reversal to "None" it'll be clearer.
18:03:41 <chris> noregret: from -$1000 to -$900 is a mathematical increase
18:04:02 <jralls> chris, That's undoing already-merged code?
18:04:46 <jralls> chris, please also squash out d2a59d3 and its revert e1894b3.
18:05:09 <chris> jralls: no; the already merged code is only about: reports handle both unreversed&reversed budgets, and the budget *editor* and *viewer* handle both unreversed &reversed budgets
18:05:41 <chris> (only the budget.scm report was heavily scrutinised)
18:05:43 <noregret> chris: yes, then I have it configured incorrectly, as it was in the decrease column
18:06:13 <jralls> Well then squash out the changes that get undone. There's no reason to do something and then undo it in a single PR!
18:06:20 <noregret> chris: it exists in libilities:mortgage loan and assets:house
18:06:59 <chris> jralls: as I mentioned earlier, the revert is part of 'enforce unreversed' i.e. remove UI to offer scrubbing
18:07:32 <chris> if we want UI to offer or delay scrubbing, then it needs gnc_dialog stuff
18:08:09 <chris> noregret: no problems with your account structure
18:09:18 <chris> noregret: the original loan would be Asset:Bank +$100,000, Liability:Mortgage -$100,000
18:10:09 <jralls> chris, I don't think we want to allow delay, it creates too much complexity with features.
18:10:11 <chris> noregret: or, if you start your book with a house already, Equity:Opening Balances +$87,000 Liability:Mortgage -$87,000
18:10:15 <chris> jralls: amen!
18:11:15 <chris> jralls: gjanssens wanted to: offer/delay scrubbing, allow manual fixing... if delayed then budgets are read-only. too complex!
18:11:26 <jralls> Yes.
18:11:42 <chris> my view: enforce scrubbing, set feature, done.
18:12:07 <chris> and later on (gnucash 6.x likely) remove old-budget support.
18:12:09 <jralls> Right. That's how features are designed. Doing something different requires redesigning features.
18:12:12 <noregret> chris: I started with a house already and right now, liabilities:loan is +100,000 - I haven't made changes to assets:checking except for - the monthly payments
18:12:43 <chris> noregret: then the initial loan balance *must* come from equity
18:13:10 <noregret> chris: i do have a asset:house with the same value
18:13:17 <noregret> chris: i'm confused now lol
18:13:36 <noregret> chris: my only equity is basically the opening balance in a checking account
18:14:00 <chris> noregret: easy -- if you bought $100,000 house in 2010, and you paid off 30% by now, your loan is 70,000
18:14:44 <chris> you create your book today: you have Equity:Opening -$100,000 Asset:House +$100,000.... and you also have Equity:Opening +$70,000 to Liability:Loan -$70,000
18:14:45 <noregret> chris: yes, that's what I have done, The remaining of the loan is in libilities:mortgage and it gets lower as i make monthyl payments
18:14:49 <noregret> not sure if i'm clear
18:15:31 <noregret> hmm, I havn't adjusted equity when i added the laon part
18:15:58 <chris> peasy
18:16:47 <chris> jralls: I'll merge the reverted commit, and repush?
18:17:00 <noregret> so i should add to equity:opening now the original loan? -whatever?
18:17:06 <chris> jralls: I'll *merge together* the commit and its reversal, and repush?
18:17:31 <chris> noregret: you're best off experimenting with a new datafile; you don't want to modify your main book unless you really understand it
18:18:09 <noregret> chris: should it be only the loan without the down payment?
18:18:15 <noregret> damn it's confusing me
18:18:21 <noregret> especially since im' new to this
18:18:59 <chris> the down payment is only involved in the house purchase, no? and if you're opening your book with a house already then the downpayment isn't recorded anywhere; it's part of the asset
18:19:03 <jralls> That's better. ;-) If you could write more expressive commit comments that would be helpful. e.g. "remove backward compatibility code" and "ensure forward-compatible code only" seem to say the same thing.
18:19:10 <noregret> chris: correct
18:19:13 <jralls> GTG now.
18:19:20 <chris> jralls: ok thx will do within 24h
18:20:11 <chris> noregret: if you already have house when you start book, then you don't record any of the following: down-payment, settlement fee, search fee, legal fees, moving costs, initial repairs
18:20:12 <noregret> chris: so If my current checkin account is lower than the loan amount, the total assets should be -ve, right?
18:20:31 <noregret> chris: right, i didn't record any of that
18:20:39 <chris> have you read the Tutorial and Concept Guide at all?
18:20:53 <noregret> chris: i just added an asset:house and a liability:loan and put in what's left of the loan
18:21:08 <noregret> chris: and then monthly payments are added as well as a decrease
18:21:20 <noregret> chris: i did read it, the laon part in this case
18:22:11 <noregret> i thought i was on the right path until i saw the loan amount increasing, lol. Since i had the initial amount as a decrease and not an increase, but i fixed that now
18:22:42 <noregret> it's just i didn't know i needed to add an equity record
18:22:50 <noregret> it does make sense tho
18:39:59 *** User__ has quit IRC
19:13:27 *** fiddlerwoaroof has quit IRC
19:14:09 *** fiddlerwoaroof has joined #gnucash
19:22:16 *** jcarl43 has quit IRC
19:32:37 <noregret> god damn it, it still doesn't add up...
19:34:13 *** KaiForce has quit IRC
19:37:55 <noregret> https://ibb.co/album/1vMsx3 - is this correct or not?
19:56:18 <chris> no you need your equity split. gnucash-user has a lot of experienced users who can explain bette.r
20:10:30 <warlord> noregret, your mortgage payment never affects Asset:House.
20:10:46 <warlord> mortgage is CASH -> Liability + Interest(Expense)
20:11:15 <warlord> So House is either fully Equity:Opening Balance or some split of Cash and Mortgage.
20:11:28 <warlord> Then you never touch House (unless you renovate)
20:13:56 *** lxop has joined #gnucash
20:14:04 <chris> warlord/jralls: maybe we adopt https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/banned.h ? :-D
20:14:37 <noregret> warlord: so House is full price of house and not loan?
20:16:01 <noregret> warlord: if so, when what's the transfer field for mortgage in the "Mortgage Loan" account ?
20:17:45 <jralls> chris, sure, as soon as everything is converted to C++ using std::string. :-P
20:17:47 <chris> nogret: Equity!!!
20:18:08 <warlord> Assets:House should be purchase price.
20:18:13 <chris> ^ snap
20:18:46 <warlord> noregret, assuming all these accounts were set up prior to start, then xfer account is Equity.
20:19:20 <warlord> If you're already accounting and then buy a house, then the house purchase is a combination of Cash and Mortgage.
20:23:26 <noregret> warlord: hosue already bought
20:24:16 <noregret> warlord: so I should now add purchase price of house in assets:house and then add a -ve equity which is the loan amount?
20:24:46 <noregret> warlord: by loan amount, I mean what's left of it, not the initial value
20:24:53 <chris> noregret: your house purchase is a Equity:OB to Asset:FA:House, of the full purchase price, dated on the purchase date
20:25:16 <warlord> noregret, yes. Your house should be OB for full purchase price, and Mortgage OB should be current balance.
20:25:17 <chris> your loan opening is Equity:OB to Liability:Loan dated on book-opening-date
20:26:28 <chris> it's not INCORRECT to have a book for 2010 onwards but the House purchase is dated in the 1970s
20:28:22 <noregret> chris: ok, so let's go baby steps, 1- i just added purchase date of house with purchase amount to equity:OB as a decrease and a transfer to asset:house, does that sound right as a first step?
20:28:41 <chris> yes
20:30:17 <noregret> chris: then going to liabilities:mortgage loan, i add current loan balance as an increase with a transfer to what?
20:31:06 <noregret> chris: oh, it should be equity:OB?
20:34:05 <chris> yes. gtg.
20:35:02 <noregret> thanks
20:37:10 <noregret> so far, equity:OB contains 3 transactions, House purchase price to assets:house (decrease), checking account balance to assets:checking (increase) and mortgage to liabilities:load (decrease), does that look right?
20:39:53 <warlord> noregret, one thing to interject -- it USUALLY makes much more sense to human brains if you operate from an asset (or liability) account instead of Equity/Income/Expense.
20:40:13 <noregret> warlord: got it
20:40:34 <noregret> warlord: asset:house now only contains a single transaction which is house price to equity:ob (decrease)
20:40:43 <warlord> The better question, instead of whether Equity:OB looks right, is do the OTHER accounts look right?
20:41:24 <warlord> Assuming you have default settings for "sign reverse" accounts, All accounts should have "positive" balances.
20:41:36 <warlord> (assuming your checking account is in the black and not in the red)
20:41:42 <noregret> warlord: lmao, idk. Basically equity as i see it has a large amount in red
20:41:56 <noregret> warlord: which is house price - checking account + loan
20:42:04 <warlord> Ignore what Equity says
20:42:19 <warlord> Like I said, operate from Assets/Liabilities
20:42:25 <noregret> yes, checking is black
20:42:38 <noregret> yes sir
20:43:13 *** Agfarmer18 has joined #gnucash
20:44:09 <noregret> warlord: so liabilities:load contains 4 transactions, first is the loan balance when i first started to equity:ob (incrase) and the rest are split payments between loan and interest and checking (decraese)
20:44:22 <noregret> apologies for the shitty typing, can't type today
20:44:46 <warlord> it's okay.
20:44:50 <warlord> and yes, that sounds right.
20:45:01 <noregret> and as I mentioned above, assets:house contains only the house price to equity (decrease)
20:46:27 <noregret> warlord: as i can see, total assets is in red since it's checking account - house price, which is a -ve
20:46:47 <noregret> that sounds right I guess?
20:47:20 *** jojo[m] has quit IRC
20:47:22 *** grepular has quit IRC
20:47:24 *** luwum[m] has quit IRC
20:47:26 *** MatrixTravelerbot[m] has quit IRC
20:47:27 *** peter-butler[m] has quit IRC
20:47:27 *** NewNick has quit IRC
20:47:30 *** katco[m] has quit IRC
20:47:30 *** ElonSatoshi[m] has quit IRC
20:47:41 <warlord> assets:house should be a positive.
20:47:46 *** David1 has joined #gnucash
20:47:46 <warlord> not a negative
20:47:49 *** David has quit IRC
20:47:49 *** David1 is now known as David
20:47:59 *** ErikSchillingAblu[m] has quit IRC
20:48:00 *** cybertani[m] has quit IRC
20:48:07 *** Julianold[m] has quit IRC
20:48:12 *** PeterScholtens[m] has quit IRC
20:49:38 *** Agfarmer18 has quit IRC
20:50:31 <noregret> damn
20:50:54 <noregret> warlord: ok fixed it, nothing in red now
20:51:17 <noregret> warlord: I thought before that loan should be in red, not black
20:51:32 <noregret> should it?
21:03:03 *** bertbob has quit IRC
21:04:35 <warlord> Probably not... but it depends on your preference setting.
21:04:49 <warlord> Loan OB should be "increase" from the Loan account
21:05:20 <noregret> warlord: Loan account? you mean from equity:ob?
21:06:00 <noregret> warlord: the only Loan account I have is "Liabilities:Mortage Loan"
21:06:33 <noregret> warlord: and "Liabilities:Mortage Loan" contains a loan OB from equity:OB
21:06:43 <noregret> as an increase
21:06:51 <warlord> No, Equity:OB is Equity.
21:06:54 <warlord> Loan is Mortgage
21:07:13 <warlord> "as an increase" -- from the Loan account.
21:07:35 <warlord> If you open the Loan account register, is the opening balance transaction in the increase column? If you open the Equity account it will be in the other column.
21:07:48 <warlord> So "as increase" is ambiguous.
21:08:26 <noregret> warlord: by loan account, do you mean "Liabilities:Mortage Loan"? and by increase, I was referring to my previous statement 'warlord: and "Liabilities:Mortage Loan" contains a loan OB from equity:OB'
21:09:10 <warlord> Do you have any other loan accounts other than your mortgage?
21:09:15 <noregret> warlord: no
21:09:34 <noregret> warlord: I do have a "Loan" placeholder if that's what you mean
21:09:50 <warlord> no, it's not what I mean
21:10:02 <noregret> i'm just shortcutting it by saying "Liabilities:Mortage Loan", in reality, it's "Liabilities:Loan:Mortage Loan"
21:10:26 <noregret> ok, then im' likely missing something
21:10:46 <noregret> where should I create this Loan account?
21:12:52 <warlord> I'm shortcutting too. "Loan" == ""Liabilities:Loan:Mortage Loan"
21:13:05 <noregret> warlord: oh ok, then we're on the same page
21:13:45 <noregret> warlord: so the mortgage or loan ob in "Liabilities:Loan:Mortage Loan" should be to itself?
21:14:00 <noregret> warlord: because currently, it's an increase from equity:ob
21:20:17 <warlord> no transaction should ever be "to itself"
21:21:02 <warlord> if you open your Mortgage Loan account, the OB transaction should have a transfer account of Equity:OB and it should be an increase -- of the current balance of the loan as of the start of your acocunting.
21:21:15 <warlord> if you go to equity, it'll be opposite
21:24:56 <noregret> warlord: yes, sounds right, that's what I currently have
21:25:22 <warlord> then you have it correct.
21:25:23 <noregret> I got confused earlier when you stated "Loan OB should be "increase" from the Loan account"
21:25:28 *** jojo[m] has joined #gnucash
21:29:13 *** grepular has joined #gnucash
21:31:45 *** luwum[m] has joined #gnucash
21:32:28 <warlord> It's a question of viewpoint.
21:32:38 <warlord> if you view the transaction from the loan account, it's an increase.
21:32:51 <warlord> if you view it from the equity account, it'll decrease
21:35:28 *** peter-butler[m] has joined #gnucash
21:36:01 *** NewNick has joined #gnucash
21:37:10 *** katco[m] has joined #gnucash
21:37:18 *** ElonSatoshi[m] has joined #gnucash
21:38:28 <noregret> warlord: correct, thanks a lot!
21:46:09 *** guak has quit IRC
21:48:33 <warlord> you're welcome
22:16:34 *** ArtGravity has quit IRC
22:26:16 *** storyjesse has joined #gnucash
22:43:52 <lxop> I don't suppose anyone had any ideas about my GST problem?
22:48:14 <lxop> Basically, to use the Income & GST report, I need to have separate accounts for GST Paid(A) and GST collected(L). Their net value will balance out over time, but their individual values will keep rising over time.
22:49:25 <lxop> Since one is an asset and the other a liability, they show up separately in the Balance Sheet, whereas it would make a lot more sense to just have the net value show as a single liability - is there a way to do that?
22:52:17 <lxop> Also, just from a presentation perspective, is it a known bug that sub-accounts of a different type (e.g., an Asset a/c that is a child of a Liability a/c) don't have their tree shown in the Balance Sheet?
22:52:53 *** bertbob has joined #gnucash
22:52:53 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v bertbob
23:43:37 *** o01eg has quit IRC