Benny Malengier wrote:
> Both true means you have person A and person B. The partner of person A
> is related to the partner of person B.
> I guess in most languages this will not have a different wording than
> the case of only one of the two being a partner.
Sorry still don't understand, how they are related.
For example rel_str is:
0,1,1,1,,f,True,False,False that is my son,
0,1,1,0,,f,True,False,True is my son's wife,
0,1,1,0,,m,True,True,True who is that person, thats what
If your wife has a son in another relation that is not part of a family with you as father, it would be the wife of the son of your wife.
That is, there is no link from you to that person. So it would be a daughter-in-law because for you wife it is a full son.
all_relationship QR show as another inlaw when checking son's wife?
> Note that in most languages the terminology does not really exist
> outside the direct family. However, for genealogy reasons it is
> interesting to see a relationship, and use the same rules of close
> family to family many generations away. For performance reasons in-law
> relationships are only visible in the quick report 'relationship to home
Is it slow, really slow or really really slow? If not the third it would
be nice to be included in RelCalc.
You need to search 3 extra branches, for people who had several wifes even more.
The optimization code and cashing code no longer work with a simple implementation, so it must be designed somewhat so as not to loose the speedup of simple caching.
I was thinking of perhaps a checkbox on relcalc tool. However, I want to concentrate on other parts of the code now. If nobody else does it, I can do it in the future. I think Rob already made a feature request for it.