Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

st: RE: Mata vs C


From   "Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   st: RE: Mata vs C
Date   Wed, 17 Aug 2005 21:35:35 +0100

As Kit says, publicly offering Stata code for payment 
has hitherto been (almost entirely) restricted to StataCorp. 

Some years ago, a British user, not now obviously active 
in Stata, did offer diskettes with some of his programs for a modest 
charge. I don't know how successful he was or how good they were. 

This restriction is of course a matter of fact rather than one of 
principle. An optimistic interpretation is that so many 
new users who start Stata programming have benefitted so 
much from free user-written extras that they feel inclined 
to reciprocate. 

Nick 
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 

Kit Baum
 
> Another advantage---which goes rather against the open-source spirit  
> of Statalist and SSC---is that Mata (like C) makes it *possible* to  
> distribute binary-only code for a routine. That makes it 
> feasible for  
> someone to sell that code. (Indeed, that is the case for StataCorp- 
> authored commands like xtmixed). Personally I hope that 
> practice will  
> not be widespread among the user community, but if someone had put  
> immense effort into developing something, they might not want 
> to give  
> it away (e.g., James Davidson's TSMOD package, which recently went  
> from free to a modest charge; the flip side, of course, is that if  
> you pay for it you are paying for support).

*
*   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/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index