Svend Juul wrote, in response to Scott C and Scott M:
> Personal view: I think the || notation is a lot less transparent than
> the () notation. So I would write the above command:
>
> twoway ///
> (line mpg price if fore == 0 , sort lc(blue) lp(dash)) ///
> (line mpg price if fore == 1 , sort lc(black)) ///
> , ///
> legend(order(1 "white sex ratio" 2 "black sex ratio"))
I aggree with most of the things Svend said, however, regarding the ||
notation I recently changed my mind. I meanwhile write commands like the
above as follows:
twoway ///
|| line mpg price if fore == 0 , sort lc(blue) lp(dash) ///
|| line mpg price if fore == 1 , sort lc(black) ///
|| , legend(order(1 "white sex ratio" 2 "black sex ratio")
Note that I use || to start the plots instead of ending them as it is proposed
in the manual. I admitt that the first mention of || is not necessary but I
think that it makes the command at least as transparent as with the ()
notation. Moreover I think it is even nicer with longer plot-subcommands:
twoway ///
|| line mpg price ///
if fore == 0 & whatever you like ///
, sort lc(blue) lp(dash) bla bla bla bal bal ///
|| line mpg price ///
if fore == 1 & some other exp ///
, sort lc(black) etc etc etc etc ///
|| , legend(order(1 "white sex ratio" 2 "black sex ratio")
Using || or () is clearly a matter of taste, and I don't want to start arguing
about it. However, what I am trying to say is that starting lines with || can
also help to structure long graph commands.
Uli
--
[email protected]
+49 (030) 25491-361
*
* 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/
