> On Jan 30, 2026, at 08:22, Stefan Koch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I don't know if this is the expected behavior for the higher level
> code.  It seems a little funky that sometimes the date/time is not
> stored in the list, or that the keys could be different, but that is
> likely OK.
> 
> I also don't know how this would affect real usage. There is no
> mentions (that a quick google search could find) of peer splits in the
> documentation. I did chance this up that the merge is only used in
> xaccScrubMergeLotSubSplits.  But that is called in more places I am
> not familiar with. If you find a bug for this I can make a pull
> request with this.
> 
> You mentioned capgains testing.  If you point me in the right
> direction, I can take a look, but I don't know where to start at this
> point.

Stefan,

I don’t know either, which is why I want better testing of the usage. I called 
it “capgains” because that’s what drives the lot scrubber. The existing test is 
libgnucash/engine/test/test-lots.c and as you can see it’s a very simple test 
that doesn’t really exercise the peer-split code at all. 

Regards,
John Ralls

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

Reply via email to