Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
| From | "Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |
| To | <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |
| 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 n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 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 n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 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/