Without commenting on the detail here, it is perhaps useful to underline a generic point, which has long been prominent, or at the very least tacit, in the Statalist FAQ.
Whenever an example hinges on a OS-crucial detail, it is helpful to flag that prominently, so that people with ignorance of, aversion to, or prejudices about that OS can just take note and leave the question to the complementary subset. Putting a tag "(Windows only)" or "(Mac only)" or "(Linux only)" when relevant would be widely helpful.
Conversely, freeing your question of OS-incidental details just makes your question that much clearer, and that much likelier to get a good focused answer -- which after all is presumably what everyone wants.
Nick
[email protected]
Chris Witte
I don't think you read my response to Martin. I already appologized for the pathway screw up that Martin pointed out. It was my original intent to remove the pathways from the code, but office distractions led me to overlook those lines in my example. I also said that Stata did not return any kind of error message, and that it just ignores my -ysize- option.
Michael Hanson
Unless I misunderstand your example (which the exchange below suggests it may fail the Statalist FAQ dictum: "Say exactly what you typed and exactly what Stata typed (or did) in response. N.B. exactly!"), it looks to me that you are not using your named graphs in your -graph combine- and -grc1leg- commands, but rather (old?) versions you have saved to disk. If so, this could yield unanticipated results.
(As an aside: why hard-code Windows-type paths into such a simple example? It is completely unnecessary, even if you are -saving()- the graphs. When people do this, they are implicitly saying they don't want any help from the many folks on Statalist who use a non-MS operating system.)
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
