These commands now detect the account types declared by account directives.
Whenever such declarations are not present, built-in regular expressions
are used, as before.
Previously you had to use one of the standard english account names
(assets, liabilities..) for top-level accounts, if you wanted to use
the bs/bse/cf/is commands.
Now, account directives can specify which of the big five categories
an account belongs to - asset, liability, equity, revenue or expense -
by writing one of the letters A, L, E, R or X two or more spaces after
the account name (where the numeric account code used to be).
This might change. Some thoughts influencing the current syntax:
- easy to type and read
- does not require multiple lines
- does not depend on any particular account numbering scheme
- allows more types later if needed
- still anglocentric, but only a little
- could be treated as syntactic sugar for account tags later
- seems to be compatible with (ignored by) current Ledger
The current design permits unlimited account type declarations anywhere
in the account tree. So you could declare a liability account somewhere
under assets, and maybe a revenue account under that, and another asset
account even further down. In such cases you start to see oddities like
accounts appearing in multiple places in a tree-mode report. In theory
the reports will still behave reasonably, but this has not been tested
too hard. In any case this is clearly too much freedom. I have left it
this way, for now, in case it helps with:
- modelling contra accounts ?
- multiple files. I suspect the extra expressiveness may come in handy
when combining multiple files with account type declarations,
rewriting account names, apply parent accounts etc.
If we only allowed type declarations on top-level accounts, or
only allowed a single account of each type, complications seem likely.
- Parse errors encountered in include files are treated as "final" parse
errors in the parent file, preventing backtracking and fixing an issue
in #853
We previously had another parser type, 'type ErroringJournalParser =
ExceptT String ...' for throwing parse errors without the possibility of
backtracking. This parser type was removed under the assumption that it
would be possible to write our parser without this capability. However,
after a hairy backtracking bug, we would now prefer to have the option
to prevent backtracking.
- Define a 'FinalParseError' type specifically for the 'ExceptT' layer
- Any parse error can be raised as a "final" parse error
- Tracks the stack of include files for parser errors, anticipating the
removal of the tracking of stacks of include files in megaparsec 7
- Although a stack of include files is also tracked in the 'StateT
Journal' layer of the parser, it seems easier to guarantee correct
error messages in the 'ExceptT FinalParserError' layer
- This does not make the 'StateT Journal' stack redundant because the
'ExceptT FinalParseError' stack cannot be used to detect cycles of
include files
- Don't immediately throw custom parse errors into 'ParsecT'; rather,
just construct and return them
- This anticipates the re-implementation of an 'ExceptT' layer of the
parser, which should be able throw custom parse errors
- In anticipation of megaparsec 7, which removes support for stacks of
include files (as far as I can tell)
- Intended for the 'StateT Journal' layer of the parser
- A stack of include files would be better in a 'ReaderT' layer, but I
don't want to add another layer to the parser
- Intended for detecting cycles of include files
- Potential issue: for proper error messages for include file cycles,
we must remember to provide the filepath of the root journal file via
the initial journal state passed to a 'JournalParser'; I imagine
that we may forget to do so because in all other cases it is okay
not to do so.
A bunch of account sorting changes that got intermingled.
First, account codes have been dropped. They can still be parsed and
will be ignored, for now. I don't know if anyone used them.
Instead, account display order is now controlled by the order of account
directives, if any. From the mail list:
I'd like to drop account codes, introduced in hledger 1.9 to control
the display order of accounts. In my experience,
- they are tedious to maintain
- they duplicate/compete with the natural tendency to arrange account
directives to match your mental chart of accounts
- they duplicate/compete with the tree structure created by account
names
and it gets worse if you think about using them more extensively,
eg to classify accounts by type.
Instead, I plan to just let the position (parse order) of account
directives determine the display order of those declared accounts.
Undeclared accounts will be displayed after declared accounts,
sorted alphabetically as usual.
Second, the various account sorting modes have been implemented more
widely and more correctly. All sorting modes (alphabetically, by account
declaration, by amount) should now work correctly in almost all commands
and modes (non-tabular and tabular balance reports, tree and flat modes,
the accounts command). Sorting bugs have been fixed, eg #875.
Only the budget report (balance --budget) does not yet support sorting.
Comprehensive functional tests for sorting in the accounts and balance
commands have been added. If you are confused by some sorting behaviour,
studying these tests is recommended, as sorting gets tricky.
Custom Show instances were obscuring important details in test failure
output again. The best policy seems to be: stick with default derived
Show instances as far as possible, but when necessary customize them
to conform to haskell syntax so pretty-show can do its thing (eg when
they contain Day values, cf https://github.com/haskell/time/issues/101).
This makes skipping/unskipping tests easier, and improves readability
a bit.
Note it's also possible to just write the test name with no preceding
function, when the type is constrained (see Journal.hs).
Amount's default show instance hid important details, making eg test
failures hard to understand. Showing full detail required increasing
the debug level which was inconvenient.
Now it has a single show instance which shows more information, is
fairly compact, and is pretty-printable with pretty-show.
Ellipses (..) in the output indicate where fields are
- not shown in full detail, and/or
- shown in pseudo syntax (double quoted) to work with pretty-show.
ghci> usd 1
OLD:
Amount {acommodity="$", aquantity=1.00, ..}
NEW:
Amount {acommodity = "$", aquantity = 1.00, aprice = NoPrice, astyle = AmountStyle "L False 2 Just '.' Nothing..", amultiplier = False}
MixedAmount's show instance is unchanged, but showMixedAmountDebug
is affected by this change:
ghci> putStrLn $ showMixedAmountDebug $ Mixed [usd 1]
OLD:
Mixed [Amount {acommodity="$", aquantity=1.00, aprice=, astyle=AmountStyle {ascommodityside = L, ascommodityspaced = False, asprecision = 2, asdecimalpoint = Just '.', asdigitgroups = Nothing}}]
NEW:
Mixed [Amount {acommodity="$", aquantity=1.00, aprice=, astyle=AmountStyle "L False 2 Just '.' Nothing.."}]
Same-line & next-line comments of transactions, postings, etc.
are now parsed a bit more precisely. Previously parsing no comment
gave the same result as an empty comment (a single newline); now
it gives an empty string.
Also, and perhaps as a consequence of the above, when there's no
same-line comment but there is a next-line comment, we'll insert an
empty first line, otherwise next-line comments would get moved up to
the same line when rendered.
Some doctests have been added.
Limiting to just the file(s) you're interested can make doctest start
much quicker. With a big caveat: you can limit the starting files,
but it will also test all other local files those import.
--slow turns off doctest's --fast flag, which skips reloading between
tests.
--verbose shows progress output as tests are run, if doctest 0.16.0+
is installed (and I believe will be harmless otherwise)
This removes transactionModifierToFunction's extra query parameter;
the rewrite command sets it in the TransactionModifier instead, which
I think is equivalent. I had to change one functional test, but it
seems correct now, so perhaps it wasn't working right before ?
I was negligent and did not test enough. This should ignore
transaction comments in auto posting rules more safely.
It also adds support for trailing comments on the first line of auto
posting rules, which previously were misparsed as part of the query.
