This isn't clear to me either. There is no "using the macros and the
dataset to print the output" independently of code containing the
macros.
My comment on payment was facetious, if not rhetorical. I am sorry you
didn't realise that.
However, I do feel much more reluctance to help other people develop
code that is going to be not only private but proprietary. Why should I
do that? I would much rather feel that in principle I was contributing
to something easily accessible. Stata isn't incompatible with users
writing Stata code for private or institutional gain, clearly, but
Statalist does function best when closest to full and free exchange of
information.
As for my own work, I regard putting ideas, discussion and tested code
in the public domain as one of the best things I can do for my
university. It's an obligation of mine to spread my work!
As far as your problem is concerned, I think you are in a cleft stick of
your own devising, as the secrecy you feel compelled to seek prevents
you making really clear in Stata terms what your problem is.
These are personal views. Others must speak for themselves.
Nick
[email protected]
Ashim Kapoor
Hi Nick,
I don't think I was clear. Here is what I do :
1. Run sometests and produce local macros and a small output dataset.
2. Use the macros and dataset to print the output.
so (2) is ALL I want any1 to see. I am not worried about encrypting
the local macros, only that I can't let anyone else see the do file i
am running to produce my macro.
Is'nt is much easier to save the macros / save the dataset and send it
to someone to see the output whethere in HTML or smcl.
Why risk someone decrypting my file ?
It's not even my IDEA, I just program it but I don't think my boss
will like it if i put it on the internet.
Is'nt everyone who comes to this list working for a company or a
university ? Would'nt their university be really upset if they gave
out their bosses unpublished work on the internet and fire them on the
spot ? Do those people pay for these services ? Oh, A small number of
times I have answered questions, should I expect to be paid for that ?
Thank you,
Ashim.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry, Ashim, but I really don't understand your comments here.
>
> First off, local macros are useless unless used in some code. Whether
> that use is interactive, via a do file, or via a program is up to you.
>
> If you want to be absolutely sure that certain collaborators, and only
> those collaborators, see that code, then you need to send it
encrypted.
> That would apply to a do file or a program, and does not _itself_ rule
> out do files.
>
> Second, saving macros in the data file runs into the same issues. You
> would need to encrypt that too, as any Stata user with the same
version
> could in principle read your data file too.
>
> In short, wanting absolute security seems to me orthogonal to all
other
> details here.
>
> For myself, I always remember what Howard Aiken said. Don't worry
about
> people stealing your ideas; if they're any good, you will have to ram
> them down their throats.
>
> Nick
> [email protected]
>
> P.S. If you are developing proprietary code, why do you expect free
> help? Shouldn't you offer to pay us?
>
> Ashim Kapoor
>
> Well in my opinion the do file won't do. Simply because the 1st half
> of my code is proprietary, I dont wnat any1 to see it. I do wnat them
> to USE the local macros / dataset at the end of the 1st half. Maybe I
> am more clear now.
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>> A matrix could not be used for macros with string content. (Strictly,
>> all macros are strings, but clearly some have numeric content.)
>>
>> Nick
>> [email protected]
>>
>> Philipp Rehm
>>
>> I think that's what do-files are for.
>>
>> Nevertheless: how about building up a matrix which contains the local
>> macros you encounter, which you then save into a variable? You could
>> then recover the local macros with -levelsof-, for example.
>>
>> But I guess a do-file is the more straightforward approach...
>>
>>
>> Ashim Kapoor wrote:
>>> I somehow feel that you can save local macros in a way other than
>>> using -notes- can you ??
*
* 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/
