[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
Ulrich Kohler <kohler@wz-berlin.de> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way? |

Date |
Tue, 25 May 2004 09:14:45 +0200 |

I don't know why you like the solution with cond(), but I prefer a solution with -inlist()- or -inrange()- for tasks like this this. With inlist() your your code-snippet might be coded like this: gen byte origin = 7 if nation == 3 replace origin = 10 if inlist(nation,8,12,69,139,141) replace origin = 8 if inlist(nation,14,82) ... Others might propose a solution with -recode- but thats a matter of taste. In any case: see -help inlist- or -help recode- for more. Annelies Vos wrote: > Dear all, > in the FAQs I found the following very useful recommendation: > instead of: > . generate byte a = 1 if y <= 20 > . replace a = 2 if y > 20 & y <= 30 > . replace a = 3 if y > 30 & y <= 40 > . replace a = 4 if y > 40 & y <. > > do the following: > > . #delim ; > . generate byte a = > cond(y<=20, 1, > cond(y<=30, 2, > cond(y<=40, 3, > cond(y<., 4, > . )))); > > However, the variable I want to use it for (nationality) has many > values (every country in the world), which should be recoded into > countrygroups. I don't really like the idea of having to count the > number of "opening brackets": "(" , to know with how many "closing > brackets": ")" I should end. Is there any easier solution for this? > > to explain a piece of my syntax: > > #delim; > > generate byte origin = > > cond(natio==3, 7, > > cond(natio==8, 10, > > cond(natio==12, 10, > > cond(natio==14, 8, > > cond(natio==28, -9, > > cond(natio==54, 6, > > cond(natio==69, 10, > > cond(natio==82, 8, > > cond(natio==139, 10, > > cond(natio==141, 10, > > ...etcetera > > ...which I would like to end on another way than: > > . )))))))))) many regards uli -- kohler@wz-berlin.de +49 (030) 25491-361 * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?***From:*"Annelies Vos" <a.vos@erasmusmc.nl>

**References**:**st: RE: common prefix to all variables***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?***From:*"Annelies Vos" <a.vos@erasmusmc.nl>

- Prev by Date:
**st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?** - Previous by thread:
**st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: multiple )))brackets, is there a more efficient way?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |