From | Chris Ruebeck <[email protected]> |
To | [email protected] |
Subject | Re: st: RE: RE: Displaying values less than one with a zero in front of the comma |
Date | Tue, 22 Feb 2005 10:22:58 -0500 |
Whoa, just a small point please! I said I like this myself, not that it should be the law!
I second two of Nick's ideas. (1) Always use the leading zero, although having the option to decide whether or not it's included in all formats is fine.
(2) More flexibility in applying different formats to different parts of the display. I'm frustrated, in particular, when I want to use a fixed format but different variables' coefficients in my regression either have a different number of significant digits or (since the concept of significant digits is questionable in economics) different magnitudes of the least significant digit. Example 1: I'd rather see 0.023 andI am intrigued here. I don't understand the comment about economics. Does the logic of showing economic numbers differ from that elsewhere?
0.0032 instead of either 0.0231 and 0.0032 or 2.3E-2 and 3.2E-3. Example 2: I'd rather see 2.3 and 0.32 than either 2.31 and 0.32 or 2.3 and 3.2E-1. ["and" takes precedence over "or" in parsing these examples.]
* * 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/
© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |