maintanance files will help when compiling a list of built-in and
supplied-with commands.
look e.g. at ...\Stata10\ado\base\c\cmddlg.maint
and in general at *.maint
IMHO the lists should be separated into language constructs (program,
end, while, if, etc), built-in commands (basic bricks), and everything
else (ado). I guess the students wanted to know what tools are at
hand, available for work, in an attempt to reduce the open-end
question "which command to use?" to a multiple choice question "which
of these to use?".
-which- and -findfile- are not useful for the purpose. because in
order to check whether the command exists or not you must have an idea
of what it may be called. I've seen a few people who would _suspect_
existence of xtivreg2. (in other words this is precisely the case
where in order to ask a question, you need to know the answer).
About 5 years ago I've seen in library a 3-volume encyclopedia (I
guess about 5000pages in total) of all software released in a
particular year (e.g. in 1990, don't remember now). Although an
immense effort was done to sort and describe all those programs, it
was surely neither complete nor accurate.
However, I see a very practical need for such a list of Stata
commands: for the purpose of syntax highlighting. It would
significantly improve the readability of the programs, because current
highlighters AFAIK are based on Stata's 6-7 syntax (at least mine is).
It may also help preventing name collisions.
Regards, Sergiy Radyakin
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> -findit- does not guarantee to find everything in the public domain. For
> example, -findit- will not find programs published informally within
> Statalist postings, such as yours this week.
>
> Nick
> [email protected]
>
> Martin Weiss
>
> Agreed! Would a combination of -findfile-, -which- and -findit- be
> sufficient?
>
> Nick Cox
>
> -which- tells whether a command is visible to Stata given your Stata
> installation and your current working directory. That is only a subset
> of existence "as we know it, Jim".
>
> Martin Weiss
>
> An alphabetical list is pointless. If it is all about the mere existence
> of
> a command, -which- is the way to go...
>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
