Mark Schaffer
> Question 2:
>
> Shouldn't the {stata} smcl command be as clever about :s as
> the {net}
> smcl command? This would eliminate the need for messy little
> auxiliary files in a command package.
>
> Comment:
>
> I don't think I would -preserve- the data etc., because I
> would want
> the user to be able to click on various examples
> separately. Rather,
> I would leave it to the user to voluntarily clear memory before
> clicking on the line in the help display that loads the example
> dataset. If Stata complains that it can't load the example data
> because the existing data would be lost, that's fine by me.
I went home for dinner. Fortunately, Vince answered
the programming bit in the interim, but I can add a
little arm-waving.
This question is about programming style and etiquette.
Often and often a program writer stops at a certain point
for all sorts of reasons, and says, in effect, "My program
does this. If you want a program to do something else,
feel free to write it yourself!"
Nevertheless, in practice, clickable examples have
been introduced by Stata developers with a certain
sales pitch, namely that you can try on the fly,
and not disturb what you're doing. That's a precedent
for user-programmers to match, it seems to me.
Personally, I see a clickable example which
requires a prior -clear- as a little user-unfriendly.
Nick
[email protected]
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
