[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?
From: |
Vadim Zeitlin |
Subject: |
Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map? |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:18:33 +0200 |
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:57:23 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:
GC> On 2017-09-26 23:12, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
[...]
GC> > Would anything be lost if I removed them? Or would it be easier for you
if
GC> > I preserved them for now? Please notice that I don't think that it's going
GC> > to make reviewing the changes any easier because all these unused titles
GC> > would still need to be changed, instead of being removed.
GC>
GC> I'd like to know which ones you want to remove.
Here is the total list of removed lines by my corresponding local commit:
---------------------------------- >8 --------------------------------------
- title_map["AddonCompOnAssets" ] = "Additional Comp on
Assets";
- title_map["AddonCompOnPremium" ] = "Additional Comp on
Premium";
- title_map["AddonMonthlyFee" ] = "Additional Monthly Fee";
- title_map["AnnGAIntRate_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Ann
Gen Acct Int Rate";
- title_map["AnnHoneymoonValueRate_Current" ] = "Curr Ann Honeymoon Value
Rate";
- title_map["AnnHoneymoonValueRate_Guaranteed"] = "Guar Ann Honeymoon Value
Rate";
- title_map["AnnPostHoneymoonRate_Current" ] = "Curr Post Honeymoon Rate";
- title_map["AnnPostHoneymoonRate_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Post Honeymoon Rate";
- title_map["AnnSAIntRate_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Ann
Sep Acct Int Rate";
- title_map["AvgDeathBft_Current" ] = "Curr Avg Death Benefit";
- title_map["AvgDeathBft_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Avg Death Benefit";
- title_map["CV7702_Current" ] = "Curr 7702 Cash Value";
- title_map["CV7702_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar 7702 Cash Value";
- title_map["ClaimsPaid_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ _______
Guar ___Claims ___Paid";
- title_map["CorpTaxBracket" ] = " _____________ Corp Tax
Bracket";
- title_map["CurrMandE" ] = "Mortality and Expense
Charge";
- title_map["DBOpt" ] = "Death Benefit Option";
- title_map["DacTaxLoad_Current" ] = " _____________ Curr DAC
Tax Load";
- title_map["DacTaxLoad_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar DAC
Tax Load";
- title_map["DacTaxRsv_Current" ] = "Curr DAC Tax Reserve";
- title_map["DacTaxRsv_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar DAC Tax Reserve";
- title_map["DeathProceedsPaid_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Death
Proceeds Paid";
- title_map["EeMode" ] = "EE Payment Mode";
-// TODO ?? This can't be a mode. I don't know how it differs from 'EeGrossPmt'
above.
- title_map["EePmt" ] = "EE Payment Mode";
- title_map["ErMode" ] = "ER Payment Mode";
-// TODO ?? This can't be a mode. I don't know how it differs from 'ErGrossPmt'
above.
- title_map["ErPmt" ] = "ER Payment Mode";
- title_map["ExpenseCharges_Current" ] = "Curr Expense Charge";
- title_map["ExpenseCharges_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Expense Charge";
- title_map["GptForceout" ] = "Forceout";
- title_map["GrossIntCredited_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Gross Int Credited";
- title_map["HoneymoonValueSpread" ] = "Honeymoon Value Spread";
- title_map["IndvTaxBracket" ] = " _____________ EE Tax
Bracket";
- title_map["LoanIntAccrued_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ ____Guar
Loan Int __Accrued";
- title_map["MlyGAIntRate_Current" ] = "Curr Monthly Gen Acct Int
Rate";
- title_map["MlyGAIntRate_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Monthly Gen Acct Int
Rate";
- title_map["MlyHoneymoonValueRate_Current" ] = "Curr Monthly Honeymoon
Value Rate";
- title_map["MlyHoneymoonValueRate_Guaranteed"] = "Guar Monthly Honeymoon
Value Rate";
- title_map["MlyPostHoneymoonRate_Current" ] = "Curr Monthly Post
Honeymoon Rate";
- title_map["MlyPostHoneymoonRate_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Monthly Post
Honeymoon Rate";
- title_map["MlySAIntRate_Current" ] = "Curr Monthly Sep Acct Int
Rate";
- title_map["MlySAIntRate_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Monthly Sep Acct Int
Rate";
- title_map["AnnualFlatExtra" ] = " _____________ Annual
Flat Extra";
-// title_map["NaarForceout" ] = "Forced Withdrawal due
to NAAR Limit";
- title_map["NetClaims_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________
_____________ Guar Net Claims";
- title_map["NetIntCredited_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Net
Int Credited";
- title_map["NetPmt_Current" ] = " _____________ Curr Net
Payment";
- title_map["NetPmt_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Net
Payment";
- title_map["PartMortTableMult" ] = "Partial Mortality
Muliplier";
- title_map["PolicyFee_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar ____Policy Fee";
- title_map["PrefLoanBalance_Current" ] = "Curr Preferred Loan Bal";
- title_map["PrefLoanBalance_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Preferred Loan Bal";
- title_map["PremTaxLoad_Current" ] = "Curr Premium Tax Load";
- title_map["PremTaxLoad_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Premium Tax Load";
-// Excluded because it's unimplemented:
-// title_map["ProducerCompensation" ] = " _____________ Producer
Compensation";
- title_map["RefundableSalesLoad" ] = " _____________ Refundable
Sales Load";
- title_map["Salary" ] = " _____________
_____________ Salary";
- title_map["SepAcctCharges_Guaranteed" ] = "Guar Sep Acct Charges";
- title_map["SpecAmtLoad_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Spec
Amt Load";
- title_map["SurrChg_Current" ] = " _____________ Curr Surr
Charge";
- title_map["SurrChg_Guaranteed" ] = " _____________ Guar Surr
Charge";
- title_map["TgtPrem" ] = " _____________ Target
Premium";
- title_map["TotalIMF" ] = "Total Investment Mgt Fee";
---------------------------------- >8 --------------------------------------
GC> Probably many are just garbage, but maybe not all. Would it make sense
GC> to ask you for a patch to 'ledger_xml_io.cpp' that demonstrates what
GC> would be removed?
I can send you the full diff as well, but it's against the new
ledger_evaluator.cpp to which I renamed ledger_xml_io.cpp (as there is
nothing XML nor IO-related any more in this file), so you wouldn't be able
to actually apply it.
GC> I'm assuming that this entire source file will soon enough be expunged,
Not expunged, but renamed -- and then changed.
GC> and that changing it directly in the savannah repository now would make
GC> your PDF-replacement work (and its review) easier.
Actually it would make it more difficult because it would result in
conflicts. I would be able to resolve them, of course, but I'd have to do
it manually and so, unless there is some other advantage of doing it, I'd
strongly prefer to avoid any changes to ledger_xml_io.cpp until my branch
is merged.
GC> > Final possibility would be to keep all this code completely unchanged
GC> > and create another set of column titles in the PDF generation code
GC> > itself. This would make the upcoming review simpler, and would allow me to
GC> > reuse the same map for all columns used in the illustration tables,
whether
GC> > they correspond to mcenum_report_column elements or not. But it would also
GC> > mean that the columns appearing both in "normal" and "supplemental"
reports
GC> > would use the same name in both, which actually seems like an advantage to
GC> > me but which is not the case currently. E.g. consider a basic column such
GC> > as "AcctVal_Guaranteed" which uses "Account Value" labels in all the
GC> > different tables it appears in, but "Guar Account Value" in supplemental
GC> > reports. So I'm not really sure whether it would be a good idea.
GC>
GC> In that example, I imagine (though I haven't checked) that the
GC> "Account Value" header would appear only under a "Guaranteed"
GC> multi-column super-header.
Yes, I think you're right.
GC> I'll need to ask whether something like
GC>
GC> ------Guaranteed------
GC> Guar Acct Guar Death
GC> Value Benefit
GC> --------- ----------
GC>
GC> would be acceptable.
It doesn't look good to me, so I don't think actual lmi users would be
happy about it. It would be possible to define a table with several columns
to have entries for "with base specified" or "with implicit base" in it.
However not all differences fall into this category, consider
"PolicyFee_Current" column, for example: it's called "Admin Charge" in the
supplemental page of the NASD illustrations, but "Curr Policy Fee" in the
supplemental report. But maybe this one is actually just a mistake because
there is also "AdminCharges" column in the reg_d_individual illustration
which is actually set to "PolicyFee + SpecAmtLoad". I suspect confirming or
disproving this risks taking quite a bit of time and effort though, so I'd
rather not wait until this is done and, for now, preserve exactly the same
behaviour as is implemented by the current code and change/fix it later if
needed.
Regards,
VZ
- [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Vadim Zeitlin, 2017/09/26
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Greg Chicares, 2017/09/26
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?,
Vadim Zeitlin <=
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Greg Chicares, 2017/09/27
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Vadim Zeitlin, 2017/09/27
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Greg Chicares, 2017/09/27
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Vadim Zeitlin, 2017/09/27
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Greg Chicares, 2017/09/27
- Re: [lmi] Can we remove unused elements of the columns title map?, Vadim Zeitlin, 2017/09/27