Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
| From | Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> |
| To | "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |
| Subject | Re: st: RE: RE: Bug with destring or operator error? |
| Date | Thu, 22 Aug 2013 19:41:51 +0100 |
Joe and I had essentially the same notion. Stata internally gives names to temporary variables that always have the double prefix __ and continue with 6 digit suffixes 000001, etc. But if somehow you have such a variable in your dataset there's a clash. It's difficult to say why it exists but this is not to be considered a bug in -destring-. Nick njcoxstata@gmail.com On 22 August 2013 19:26, Ben Hoen <bhoen@lbl.gov> wrote: > *So I added the following before the destring and it solved the problem! > desc // the variable __000001 is listed there. > drop __000001 //this did drop this variable > > *and then destring worked fine. > > *without the drop command it still hiccupped. See trace output below > *FYI I used parmest (via SSC) to create the bgreg.dta dataset > * I have no idea what that variable would have been it is not shown in the > regression output. > * in the dataset it is located between the p-value and the lower CI * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/