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

alloc in foy #37

Closed
benjello opened this issue Mar 1, 2014 · 3 comments
Closed

alloc in foy #37

benjello opened this issue Mar 1, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

@benjello
Copy link
Member

benjello commented Mar 1, 2014

Issue by benjello from Saturday Mar 01, 2014 at 00:09 GMT
Originally opened as openfisca/openfisca-core#211


Issue by AlexisEidelman from Thursday May 30, 2013 at 15:32 GMT
Originally opened as https://github.com/openfisca/openfisca/issues/212


I try to clean the get value function.
Doing this I figured out that there is might be a problem with actual code and alloc in irpp.
It's not a big deal as it's still virtual for now, but is was coded as it was simpler than it is in real.
I mean in some case, a familiy is on two declaration (non married couple) so what af should we put ? There is also more complicated case. My point is just that there is no order between fam and foy so a legislation should be explicit on that point.

I change the code by commenting these line and let af = 0 instead.

@benjello
Copy link
Member Author

benjello commented Mar 1, 2014

Comment by benjello from Saturday Mar 01, 2014 at 00:09 GMT


Comment by AlexisEidelman from Thursday May 30, 2013 at 16:17 GMT


I changed a little bit my mind.
Waiting doing something better, in these case of calling a fam entity at a foy level (or the opposite), by default, in these cases, I look for the value of the head of the entity. It definitely should be explicit but let's do it that way at the moment.

@benjello
Copy link
Member Author

benjello commented Mar 1, 2014

Comment by benjello from Saturday Mar 01, 2014 at 00:09 GMT


Comment by benjello from Thursday May 30, 2013 at 16:52 GMT


That is the way we fought we should go when we implemented it

@MattiSG
Copy link
Member

MattiSG commented Mar 20, 2017

Issue ayant plus de 3 ans, pas de travail actif, je ferme.

@MattiSG MattiSG closed this as completed Mar 20, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants