Re: [lmi] questionable code checking for e_currbasis in ihs_acctval.cpp

[Greg Chicares]

On 2008-03-24 04:31Z, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> 
>  There are 4 occurrences of the following expression in ihs_acctval.cpp:
> 
>         !e_currbasis == ExpAndGABasis
> 
> which attracted my attention because MSVC complained about 
> 
>       '==' : unsafe mix of type 'bool' and type 'int' in operation

That demonstrates the value of using another compiler.

> But maybe the real intention was
> 
>       e_currbasis != ExpAndGABasis

That was definitely the intention. After all these years, I still
think in APL, which has seventeen fewer levels of operator
precedence than C++ if you equate no precedence with zero.

We'll have to test this correction carefully, even though it's
"obviously" right. I think we're okay because experience rating
would be shown in practice only on current-basis supplemental
illustrations, but we will have to revise regression tests. So it
could be a few days before you see this fixed in cvs, especially
because I'm first trying to work through the hunks of Vaclav's
  https://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/?6411
that I haven't yet applied, before turning to the many issues
with 'configurable_settings.xml'....