Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: Thomas Gagne <tgagne@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 14:46:26 -0500
topmind wrote:
Thomas Gagne wrote:GAAP highly recommends double-entry book keeping. Even in practice, it is a good tool for financial OLTP systems to make sure nothing is accidentally recorded to the system that doesn't balance. After all, we don't want someone increasing their account balance if there wasn't a source of funds involved, would we?
<snip>
That is what I was asking. I was not sure if the criticism of my
suggestion was from a legal standpoint or an implementation standpoint.
Thus, I commented on both possibilities rather than play 20 questions.
--
Visit <http://blogs.instreamfinancial.com/anything.php> to read my rants on technology and the finance industry.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: Doc O'Leary
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: topmind
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- References:
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: Thomas Gagne
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: topmind
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Prev by Date: Re: looking for a predicate hierarchy
- Next by Date: Re: Databases as objects
- Previous by thread: Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Next by thread: Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Index(es):