It's your call. -tknz- is up there on SSC for some reason:
either the problem bothered me at the time, or it bothered
some one on Statalist, so I posted a solution.
So, given that it exists accessibly, I drew attention to
it. What I would like to believe that anyone looking at -tknz-
because they have the same problem would borrow the idea,
amd not necessarily adopt it as yet another little
command.
At this point, therefore, I think the bigger public service
is to draw attention to programming tricks that can be
used in people's code, or to develop Mata functions,
as that's the way of the future.
Nick
[email protected]
David Elliott
> Thank you, Nick. I can indeed see situations where that would be an
> improvement when dealing, as in my case, with repeat tokenizing while
> the first set of numbered positional macros were still in play.
> However, I am presuming that -macro shift- will not work with the
> resultant macros. I've looked at your tknz as suggested and would
> offer the following modification to handle my situation:
>
> X=============================X
>
> *! 2.0.2 NJC DCE Sept 2006
> * 2.0.1 NJC 17 March 2006
> * 2.0.0 NJC 12 June 2005
> program tknz2
> version 9
> //
> // stub() - optionally add a prefix to a positionally numbered macro
> // parse() - character(s) upon which to parse per normal tokenize
> // nochar - exclude parsing character from list
> //
> syntax anything(name=list everything id="list to parse
> required") ///
> [, Stub(str) noCHAR Parse(str) ]
> if "`parse'" == "" {
> local parse " "
> }
> tokenize `list' , parse(`parse')
> local i = 0
> local j = 0
> while "``++j''" != "" {
> c_local `stub'`++i' `"``j''"'
> if "`char'" == "nochar" & `"`parse'"' != " " {
> local ++j
> }
> }
> end
>
> X=============================X
>
> Note that I have made stub an option in the case that a user wanted to
> keep it as a list of numbered positional macros. (This is potentially
> dangerous, however, since the c_local makes them persist and they
> could cause a problem with later looping through the list after a
> further tokenize or the like. Perhaps it is *too* dangerous and stub
> should be required, any thoughts?) The nochar option is new and would
> cause the ado to skip the nonspace parse characters when creating the
> new sequential macros. If folks think this is worth adding to SSC, I
> will rewrite the hlp file with the added option. (I still think that
> should be an option with -tokenize- !)
>
> Thanks again to you both for your help in explaining this and
> providing alternatives.
*
* 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/
