<>
I am not quite sure how I can provide you with additional support. If it is
all about the marginal effect, I would have Stata display the matrix with
the marginal effects alluded to in an earlier post, and check the contents.
You must extract the one component that you are interested in, and I suspect
that you somehow are grabbing the wrong one - which would explain the
observation that not one, but all of them are missing.
HTH
Martin
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Nirina F
Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. September 2009 16:16
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: st: AW: why is this graph all over the place?
Dear Martin,
Using levelsof does make a difference. But I don't understand why the
loop doesn' work and therefore doesn't record the new marginal effects
calculated into marg when I put my own equation.
And I really don't change anything else than the variables.
Thanks,
nirina
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good point. I had forgotten that part of the history. Some if not all
versions of -levels- did not support non-integer values.
>
> Nick
> [email protected]
>
> Martin Weiss
>
> "-levels- and -levelsof- had, and have, the same functionality, so any
> other guesses are off target."
>
>
> Why does -levels- make Stata choke, then, in this example, where
-levelsof-
> does not?
>
>
>
> *************
> clear*
>
> input x
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4.5
> end
>
> compress
> list, noobs
>
> levelsof x
> levels x
> *************
>
>
>
> HTH
> Martin
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Nick Cox
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. September 2009 11:33
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: RE: st: AW: why is this graph all over the place?
>
> -levelsof- was -levels- was -vallist-.
>
> That is, a user-written command called -vallist- was rewritten as
> -levels- which was then adopted by StataCorp within the life-time of
> Stata 8. In Stata 9 the name was changed to -levelsof- because the name
> "levels" seemed too good to use on that command.
>
> My guess is that it was imagined that the name might reappear for a
> different purpose as part of the factor variables project.
>
> -levels- and -levelsof- had, and have, the same functionality, so any
> other guesses are off target.
>
> Nick
> [email protected]
>
> Nirina F
>
> Replacing it with -levelsof- made it work!
>
> Martin Weiss
>
>> See, just when I thought I knew Stata: -levels- is not the
> abbreviation for
>> -levelsof-, it is an out-of-date command, apparently with limited
>> functionality.
>
>
> *
> * 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/
*
* 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/
