[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
st: RE: error message about Mata memory
Kit deleted the posting by Shihe Fan to which
my posting was the reply. Shihe's posting was clearly
about Stata. Despite the name of the thread, Shihe
made a comment picking up something Bobby Gutierrez
said (about -xtmixed-, a Stata command).
The story with Mata is indeed different and something
like tracing I presume to be a matter Mata masters
and mistresses will have on their amenda. In fact, it is
surely a priority for MataCorp.
> Nick said
> If I understand this correctly, you need to find out
> about -set trace-.
> . set trace on
> sets tracing of commands so that you can see where
> in the code a command failed. Tracing can be tuned
> in various ways.
> I don't know anything about SAS, but if your ideal
> is equivalent to
> error 198;
> at line ... of -foobar-
> -foobar- was called from line ... of -whizzbang-
> -whizzbang- was called from line ... of -bushranger-
> well, that's another style, and ultimately equivalent
> to Stata's style.
> Not quite. If in an ado-file you give the command
> mata: myfunc("arguments")
> and some error arises in myfunc, you just get an abort. You are not
> told where within myfunc (or where within whatever Mata function
> myfunc might call) the error occurs in any useful way. The example
> that provoked this thread included a stack trace through
> several Mata
> functions, but the information about where in the ultimate module
> (xtm_mixed_ll_uu()) the abend occurs is, regrettably, not available.
* For searches and help try: