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

RE: st: Invalid file specification

From   "Hendri Adriaens" <>
To   <>
Subject   RE: st: Invalid file specification
Date   Sun, 8 Jul 2007 18:57:32 +0200


> Kvetching about Stata's inability to detect and analyze your mistakes
> is an unproductive, or even counterproductive, use of Statalist (you
> got an answer to your initial question within 5 hours; casting
> yourself as a complainer may reduce Statalist's response time).

I only responded to the reactions. I thanked you after your help with my
problem. For me, the topic was closed. I didn't reopen it. I didn't put that
initial remark in a ps for nothing. I didn't complain. The remarks in the
reactions raised very natural questions. I only posted them. You might be
right that this is not the right place. So let's close it then.

For what it's worth, I think it wasn't couterproductive. Everyone can see
now in which trap they might land and they can try to avoid it.

> You
> don't seem to take my point about there being an arbitrary line
> between intelligent error trapping and bloated internal code that
> Stata draws in one place, and various others might draw lower or
> higher.

I told you I'd use your recommendation.

> That said, I agree that there is an inconsistency in handling code
> following an open brace--try out this code:
>  if 1==1 { di "ok" }
>  di "not ok"
>  }
>  if 1==0  di "not"
>  else { di  "else" }
>  foreach v of varlist _all { d `v'
> to see what I mean. Part of the issue no doubt is that -if- has an
> immediate form, e.g.
>  if 1==1  di "ok"
> but since -else- can report the same error as -foreach-, I think -if-
> could probably be made to do the same.

My point too. So we can close it.


*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2017 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index