Add "fixed" to the regex used to exclude asset accounts from cashflow
reports. Assumes accounts are set up something like:
assets:fixed assets:equipment
assets:fixed assets:vehicles
assets:fixed assets:buildings
Older megaparsec is still supported.
Also cleans up our custom parser types,
and some text (un)packing is done in different places
(possible performance impact).
This patch fixes a bug that happened when using the -H option on
a period without any transaction. Previously, the behavior was no
output at all even though it should have shown the previous ending balances
of past transactions. (This is similar to previously using -H with -E,
but with the extra advantage of not showing empty accounts)
The new entry effectively adds a loan which is placed in the checking account.
This loan is then closed by the "pay off" transaction (which was already
present).
This is mainly to be used as a test point for the -H option; to make
sure -H does not show empty accounts.
All previous tests were changed to reflect the new change.
The documentation of the journal module was updated too.
Of the 2 tests, the first is a simple test on a specific period.
The second is expected to fail at this point until the new upcoming
code to fix the issue with the history option is implemented.
For the record : this issue happens when we use the -H flag for a period
that does not contain any transactions. Currently, the ending balance
values are only taken into account if the current period contains
a Transaction containing one of the previous populated accounts.
For example, if we have a statement on the 2008/01/01 for $1
and we do a command (with -H) to check the value on the
(without transactions) 2008/01/02, we will not get the $1 from
2008/01/01. In that same example, if we had a transaction for the same
account as 2008/01/01 in say 2008/01/03 then the -H command would
successfully show the statement from 2008/01/03 with the initial amount
that we set in 2008/01/01.
These tests verify the behavior when we input a very specific period.
The second test is meant to make sure that the new upcoming code in
MultiBalanceReports will not change anything in the behavior of
the module BalanceReport.
