From: Peter L. <pet...@te...> - 2009-01-30 14:26:51
|
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Benny Malengier > > <ben...@gm...>wrote: > > 2009/1/30 Doug Blank <dou...@gm...> > > > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Benny Malengier < > >> > >> ben...@gm...> wrote: > >>> 2009/1/30 Doug Blank <dou...@gm...> > >>> > >>>> I notice that src/Relationship.py looks like it has support to > >>>> describe in-laws, but in trunk I see that I am not related to my > >>>> father-in-law in the status bar, nor in the Relationship Calculator > >>>> Tool. Is that a bug, or by design? I didn't see in the wiki docs any > >>>> mention of in-laws, and don't remember if this was mentioned when > >>>> Benny enhanced the relcalc this past year. > >>> > >>> Only the quick report shows inlaws i believe, as you wait anyway for > >>> this specific person's relation to the home person to come up. > >>> Performance reasons are at the basis for not showing it elsewhere. I > >>> don't have hard data that it is much less performant, but for inlaw you > >>> have at least 4 (can be much more in multiple marriages) possibilities > >>> to scan, otherwise only one. > >>> > >>> Benny > >> > >> Great, thanks for the pointer. Is that code that could be put in the > >> calculator? I'm looking for a way to make a "deep relationship finder" > >> (find any possible relationship) without having to do it by hand, or > >> copying that code. Or is it necessarily stand-alone? > > > > I'm not following. The code is fully reusable with some parameters. > > Relationship calc, quickreport and status bar all call the same function. > > What is the easiest way to find an arbitrary relationship between two > people? It looks like the code in the all_relations quick view takes some > special processing to search the in-laws? I was wondering if that in-law > logic could be put in one function? > > Also, I note that the "Quick View" is more thorough than the "Relationship > Calculator" Tool. I would think that the tool would be at least as thorough > as the quick view. The tool uses: > > rel_strings, common_an = self.relationship.get_all_relationships( > self.db, self.person, > other_person) > > What would that change to to get the in-laws? > > One final question: Does the quick view version find all possible > connections between two people (up to the max generation limit)? I'm > wondering because I ended up with a group of people in my tree that I can't > find how they are related to me. I'm wondering if I can find the link > (however weak it might be) between any of them and me through the tools > already in GRAMPS, or do I need to do a "deep search" to recursively find > the connection? > Doug If use the "FamilyLine Graph", with myself and the other person as the persons of intrest, to show how we are related. /Peter |