A plain
. log
returns the information you need as r-class stuff.
This is documented at [R] log.
With commands of the kind you indicated,
I have done what you outline, split with
-gettoken- and then use -syntax-. It is
worth knowing that -syntax- looks at the
contents of local 0. Thus you need to
assign that before each call to -syntax-.
Note also that each -syntax- call will
zap (overwrite, possibly with empty strings)
the contents of local macros like varlist,
if, in, etc. Hence you may need to save
these before any second -syntax- call.
Nick
[email protected]
David Elliott
> I'd like to test to see if (1) a logfile is open and (2)
> capture its name.
> The logfile name does not seem to be part of the creturn c() system
> values although the currently used file name -c(filename) - and pwd
> -c(pwd) are available.
>
> Is there an equivalent to mata's pathsplit(path,path1,path2) command
> which would be very useful for filename handling? I have found the
> undocumented _getfilename which is useful for popping the filename off
> the end of a path/filename string and one can then do a bit of
> manipulation to get the path, filename and extension for further
> manipulation.
>
> Currently I have the following which will do the job:
>
> // Get the filename, path and extension for the log file.
> quietly log
> local log = r(filename)
> if "`log'" != "." {
> _getfilename "`log'"
> local logfile = r(filename)
> local logpath = subinstr(substr("`log'",1,
> length("`log'")-length("`logfile'")),"\","/",.)
> gettoken nameonly extonly: logfile, parse(".")
> local logstem "`logpath'""`nameonly'"
> local extonly = substr(`"`extonly'"',2,.)
> di in gr "`logpath'" in ye "`nameonly'" in gr "." in
> white "`extonly'"
> }
> else {
> di in red "No logfile open"
> }
> // end excerpt
>
> The other question I have is whether there is a way for -syntax- to
> handle command lines in the form: -cmd1, options: cmd2, options- or is
> it always necessary to nibble the command line apart with gettoken, or
> at least to get the left and right halves into a form for syntax to
> handle. If not obvious already, I am trying to create a "wrapper" for
> another command(s). If one didn't want the wrapper command to have
> options, one could simply use -cmd1 cmd2,options- that could be parsed
> by syntax. It is the need to have the ",options" and the ":"
> separator following cmd1 that causes the difficulties.
>
> This is my first foray into writing this kind of ado and I'd
> appreciate any insights or cautions from the pros. Thanks.
*
* 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/
