Comment by superzamp

Comment by superzamp 9 hours ago

2 replies

That's a very good question. So the DSL here operates an agnostic source/dest transaction model, which is akin to the credit/debit model sans the semantic baggage. The goal of this model is indeed to be "tracking transactions" in the abstract sense, having the benefit of not forcing accounting decisions too early on when there is (still yet) none.

For example, if you create a transaction moving money from "@stripe:main" to "@acct:123" and "@acct:234", you're merely representing the fact that you want this money to be moved. Wether the movement is clearing off a liability or generating revenue is another concern that you (in our model) want to take care of in a separate layer, that will also likely involve some intense intentionality and iterations from your accounting team.

In a sense, it's as close to accounting than it is to warehousing money, moving unitary boxes of it from one location to another.

These two models have the same amount of information per entry, so they can actually be converted from one to another, enabling you to also represent some accounting-ish transactions with this DSL, e.g. with a send [USD/2 100] from @ar:invoices:1234 to @sales.

mamidon 7 hours ago

I'm living this life right now; except we baked in notions of Assets/Liabilities/Income/Expenses into our ledger logic. Only to realize our customers don't care and just want to do whatever it is they've been doing.

bbor 7 hours ago

Fascinating, thanks for taking the time to educate! Makes sense to me — it seems this tool is purpose built for situations where tracking is complex enough to deserve decoupling from annotating or interpreting, to put it in my own kindergarten terms.

I don’t have a need for this personally but I’ll definitely be bouncing this around in my head for a while, both technically (JS ALL the things!) and methodologically. Accounting is pretty trivial when you don’t have any income to track!