re: Re: st: RE: Stata 9 announcement

[David Airey <david.airey@vanderbilt.edu>]

.

> I am curious what the implications are for -gllamm-. Will it be faster 
> now? Will Stata now have built-in alternatives to much of its 
> features? I've avoided -gllamm- partly because I heard that, while it 
> was a great program, it could be unbearably slow. Speeding up -gllamm- 
> seemed to be a frequent request on this list; does V. 9 address this 
> at all?
I'm just speculating and ignorant, but has "Mata" been put in place in 
part to deal with this? Maybe gllamm has to be re-written in Mata and 
plug-ins to achieve faster timing and maybe this is being left up to 
its authors. Stata seems to want to provide the tools to solutions in 
addition to many solutions. From the online pages, seems speed and Mata 
are in the same sentence a few times and that xtmixed is written with 
Mata. I guess there were 3 solutions to speed up gllamm, (1) code it 
into Stata (outside ado's) (2) make C plug-ins possible (3) think hard 
about the .ado architecture for programs like gllamm.

-Dave

*
*   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/