Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
st: RE: AW: RE: RE: variable labels and reshape--reinserting en masse
From
"Nick Cox" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: AW: RE: RE: variable labels and reshape--reinserting en masse
Date
Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:32:09 +0100
Yes, and for that reason -for- was a source of much small pleasure (when
it worked as the user intended) and of a great deal of frustration and
wasted time (when it didn't). In 2002 I advised against learning it
http://www.stata-journal.com/sjpdf.html?articlenum=pr0005
and in 2003 I wrote an obituary
http://www.stata-journal.com/sjpdf.html?articlenum=pr0009
It is actually still in Stata 11 but not even "undocumented".
Nick
[email protected]
Martin Weiss
The syntax looks neat, compared with today`s requirements of opening
braces
not followed by anything, and closing braces demanding a line of their
own
:-)
Nick Cox
Hewan is referring to an old Stata command -for-, last documented in
Stata 7.
Nick
[email protected]
Martin Weiss
Where does the "for any 5 6a 6b 8_2:" syntax come from?
Hewan Belay
for any 5 6a 6b 8_2: local myvarlab_X : variable label biqX
*
* 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/