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: xtline, xtline2 and cmissing(n)
From
"Giovanni Vecchi" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: AW: xtline, xtline2 and cmissing(n)
Date
Fri, 14 May 2010 17:08:12 +0200
Martin,
thank you.
Your examples work fine.
However, I've just realized that a conflict arises if you also include the
option -overlay- among the options (no matter whether you use -xtline- or
-xtline2-).
Once I include both -cmissing(n)- and -overlay- ... I'm back to square one:
. xtline2 x, overlay cmissing(n) name(mygr2, replace) nodraw
option cmissing() not allowed
r(198);
Giovanni
------------------------------------------------------------------
Giovanni Vecchi
Associate Professor
Department of Economics
University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
voice + 39 06 72595730
fax + 39 06 2020500
email [email protected]
web http://www.economia.uniroma2.it/vecchi/
-----------------------------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:owner-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Weiss
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 4:46 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: st: AW: xtline, xtline2 and cmissing(n)
>
>
> <>
>
> In 10.1, I get the old behavior with -xtline-, and the new behavior, i.e.
> respect for -cmissing()-, for -xtline2-
> (http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2009-10/msg00291.html), just as
> promised:
>
>
> *************
> clear*
> vers 10.1
>
> set obs 4
> gen id=_n
> expand 10
> bys id: gen time=_n
> gen x=runiform()
> xtset id time
> replace x=. if runiform()<.3
>
>
> xtline x, cmissing(n) name(mygr, replace) nodraw
> xtline2 x, cmissing(n) name(mygr2, replace) nodraw
>
> graph combine mygr mygr2, col(1)
> *************
>
>
> In 11, both yield identical results.
>
>
> HTH
> Martin
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Giovanni
> Vecchi
> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Mai 2010 16:15
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: st: xtline, xtline2 and cmissing(n)
>
> Dear All,
>
> following up on a couple of emails on the failure of -xtline- to account
> for
> the -cmissing(n)- option
> (http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2009-10/msg00291.html), I'm
writing
> to report that, in my experience, the bug in -xtline- has not been fixed.
> Nor does -xtline2-, kindly provided by Jeff Pitblado, work for me.
>
> After running a number of experiments under both Stata 10.1 and Stata 11,
> I'm now short of ideas and seeking for your advice.
>
> Giovanni
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Giovanni Vecchi
> Associate Professor
> Department of Economics
> University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
>
> voice + 39 06 72595730
> fax + 39 06 2020500
> email [email protected]
> web http://www.economia.uniroma2.it/vecchi/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> __________ Informazioni da ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versione del database
> delle
> firme digitali 5115 (20100514) __________
>
> Il messaggio e stato controllato da ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> www.nod32.it
>
>
> *
> * 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/
__________ Informazioni da ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versione del database delle
firme digitali 5115 (20100514) __________
Il messaggio è stato controllato da ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
www.nod32.it
*
* 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/