Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bug(journal): debit/credit column grouping does not render currencies properly. #1724

Closed
jniles opened this issue May 31, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2085
Closed

bug(journal): debit/credit column grouping does not render currencies properly. #1724

jniles opened this issue May 31, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2085

Comments

@jniles
Copy link
Collaborator

jniles commented May 31, 2017

The Journal's debit/credit currency display can sometimes result in what look like imbalanced transactions. This can be fixed with a simple call to Number.prototype.toFixed(4) as was previously done for the logical comparisons. Now we need to do it for the display values.

See below:
bugdebitcreditgrouprounding
Fig 1: Some values are very, very long, making it look unbalanced.

Solution
In the journal's columnDefs, their is a property customTreeAggregationFinalizerFn, which can take a function. For example, here is the function that renders dates. The programmer should simply create this function to the debit_equiv, debit, credit_equiv, and credit columns, and return value.toFixed().

@jniles
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jniles commented Jul 9, 2017

Was this ever addressed?

@jniles
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jniles commented Aug 10, 2017

@sfount are you tackling this in your Journal Editing refactor?

@sfount
Copy link
Contributor

sfount commented Aug 10, 2017

@jniles there is nothing planned in the editing work that deals with this issue - the issue of precision in line items and totals for reports and modules between selecting the data from the database to presenting it to the user should be tackled to set up a standard going forward.

@jniles jniles self-assigned this Aug 22, 2017
bors bot added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2017
2085: refactor: Posting Journal and Associated Tools r=mbayopanda a=jniles

This Pull Request finalizes the refactor of the Posting Journal and associated modules.  The commit history contains a full list of changes.  In brief:
 1. Editing has been moved out into a modal.  By breaking out the editing code, the complexity of the Posting Journal is reduced.  It also enforces editing a single transaction at a time.
 2. The Trial Balance has moved into Stored Procedures.  This separates the JS code from the SQL code and speeds up the execution of the Trail Balance slightly.
 3. The Trial Balance no longer reloads data between `$state` changes.  The modal is much more snappy than previous.
 4. Links to the receipts/documents/patients associated with each transaction are embedded in the Posting Journal.  This makes it easy to find the details associated with a given transaction.
 5. The Posting Journal is able to load "posted" transactions.  To accommodate this, the Posting Journal footer has been improved to show the number of unposted or posted transactions.  Additionally, the "Posted Journal" module has been removed.

There have been a number of miscellaneous bug fixes addressed as well.  As with any change, this may introduce new bugs specific to the changes listed above.

Partially addresses #1432.

Closes #1034.
Closes #1163.
Closes #1402.
Closes #1500.
Closes #1640.
Closes #1659.
Closes #1716.
Closes #1717.
Closes #1724.
Closes #1832.
Closes #1839.
Closes #1921.
Closes #1928.
Closes #1934.
Closes #1943.
Closes #1944.
Closes #1948.
Closes #1950.
Closes #1961.
Closes #2031.
Closes #2041.

---

### TODO Before Merge
 - [x] Ensure all keys are translated into both French and English
 - [x] Ensure tests pass
 - [x] Make sure all filters/links work on Posting Journal page.
 - [x] Make sure all filters/links work on the Trial Balance
 - [x] Ensure all editors work as expected.
 - [x] Ensure that new code passes lint checks.
@bors bors bot closed this as completed in #2085 Sep 25, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants