My preference is for the balance column to be recalculated in the filter views. The benefit is that the filtered balance more accurately forecasts the actual balance in the account (i.e. the bank's balance) without having to change the transaction dates of cleared transactions to match the bank's cleared date. I can keep the transaction dates as the bill due dates.
My standard way of working is to show unreconciled transactions only, to keep the transaction dates as the actual due dates, and to reconcile frequently. Under this scenario, recalculating the transaction balance is very beneficial and is my choice for the way to go.
I have been trying to get something clear in my own mind about the View Reconciled/Unreconciled views. To test the correctness of what I have done, I have created a spreadsheet and a database, then compared it with the results from mmex 0.9.8.0. With the un-reconciled view, I am getting different results.
Obviously not understanding the problem, can't explain why. I have also attached the files.
What am I doing wrong?
Your worksheet labeled "Unreconciled View Ledger" is missing a 50 in the withdraw column of row 4, the transaction that is dated 11/3/2012. If you add the 50, the "Unreconciled View Ledger" balance and the "Reconciled View Ledger" balance will equal the "General Ledger Example" balance.
-80 + 260 = 180
I'm not sure if this answers your question or not.
By the way, the "Displayed Bal" at the top of the account register is not needed when one is viewing all except reconciled. The Displayed balance will always equal the Diff.
I did not spot this, but this is not the issue.
The Flagged transaction caused that mistake, as I did this at the last minute to test all-except reconciled.
Fixing this in the spreadsheet and removing the flagged transaction, when I compare the screens of 0.9.8.0 and 9.9.9.0_dev_3127 to view the View Un_reconciled, I have just now discovered that in 0.9.8.0, the balances have been increased by the value of the Reconciled Balance for View Unreconciled but not for All Except Reconciled.
I have been experimenting with the drop down list that includes View Last 30 days, View Last 90 days, and View Last 3 Months. All of these views exclude future transactions that are beyond the current month. If today is in month x and I have future transactions in the register that occur x+1, all of these views exclude the x+1 transactions. Thinking about it, it may be more appropriate to base the View Last 30 days or 90 days off of the date of the last transaction in the register rather than today's date. I'm not sure what to think about the View Last 3 Months, as that seems very similar in name to View Last 90 days. This view currently looks includes all transactions to the end of month x whereas View Last 90 days excludes all transactions beyond today. Maybe View Last 3 Months could be x-3, x-2, and x-1 transactions.
jamie wrote: I'm not sure what to think about the View Last 3 Months, as that seems very similar in name to View Last 90 days.
To answer the question:
View Last 3 Months: Displays the dates within the last 3 months, based today's date month.
If today's date is the 11th November, the start date is: 1st September
View Last 90 Days: Displays the dates within the last 90 Days, based today's date day.
If today's date is the 11th November: start date is: 13th August
The reference point for these views is today, as the title suggests.
Current Month, Last Month and Last 30 Days - A similar thing aplies.
Ignore Future Transaction status, refers to calculations, therefore Future transactions are not displayed in these views.