IntenseFinance/gnucash
3
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash.git synced 2025-02-25 18:55:30 -06:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

oops, fix a thinko ...

Browse Source 
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.gnucash.org/repo/gnucash/trunk@1277 57a11ea4-9604-0410-9ed3-97b8803252fd
This commit is contained in:
Linas Vepstas 1998-10-06 06:55:24 +00:00
parent 8b84f3c4c2
commit c64b796928
1 changed files with 26 additions and 21 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

47
src/engine/Transaction.c
View File

@ -44,9 +44,9 @@
*
* The following values have significance:
* 0 -- anything goes
* 1 -- The sum of all splits in a transaction will be'
* 1 -- The sum of all splits in a transaction will be
* forced to be zero, even if this requires the
* creation of additonal splits. Note that a split
* creation of additional splits. Note that a split
* whose value is zero (e.g. a stock price) can exist
* by itself. Otherwise, all splits must come in at
* least pairs.
@ -777,34 +777,39 @@ xaccTransCommitEdit (Transaction *trans)
/* At this point, we check to see if we have a valid transaction.
* As a result of editing, we could end up with a transaction that
* has no splits in it, in which case we delete the transaction and
* return. Alternately the transaction may have only one split in
* it, in which case ... that's OK if and only if the split has no
* value (i.e. is only recording a price). Otherwise, a single
* split with a value can't possibly balance, thus violating the
* rules of double-entry, and that's way bogus. So delete
* the split, delete the transaction. I suppose we could
* generate an error or something like that at this point,
* to let the user know that we blew away a split.
* return.
*/
split = trans->splits[0];
if (!split ||
((NULL == trans->splits[1]) && (!(DEQ(0.0, split->damount)))))
if (!split)
{
/* Make a log in the journal before destruction. */
xaccTransWriteLog (trans, 'D');
if (split) {
acc = split->acc;
MARK_SPLIT (split);
xaccAccountRemoveSplit (acc, split);
xaccAccountRecomputeBalance (acc);
xaccFreeSplit (split);
trans->splits[0] = NULL;
}
xaccFreeTransaction (trans);
return;
}
/* Alternately the transaction may have only one split in
* it, in which case ... that's OK if and only if the split has no
* value (i.e. is only recording a price). Otherwise, a single
* split with a value can't possibly balance, thus violating the
* rules of double-entry, and that's way bogus. So create
* a matching opposite and place it either here (if force==1),
* or in some dummy account (if force==2).
*/
if ((1 == force_double_entry) &&
(NULL == trans->splits[1]) && (!(DEQ(0.0, split->damount))))
{
Split * s = xaccMallocSplit();
xaccSplitSetMemo (s, split->memo);
xaccSplitSetAction (s, split->action);
s->damount = -(split->damount);
s->share_price = split->share_price;
xaccTransAppendSplit (trans, s);
s->acc = NULL;
xaccAccountInsertSplit (split->acc, s);
}
trans->open &= ~DEFER_REBALANCE;
xaccTransRebalance (trans);