Statalist


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: st: Using for within Mata optimize to loop over observations


From   "Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   RE: st: Using for within Mata optimize to loop over observations
Date   Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:31:56 -0000

This was raised by Bill Dupont not so long ago. The thread is
encapsulated in 

<http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2008-04/msg00652.html> 

There's room for disagreement on this issue of listserver practices, but
my own stance is that we lose more on Statalist by people never
continuing or closing a thread -- which is very common -- than by
closing notes of "Thanks. The solution was in fact X." which some people
don't want to read. (I doubt that anyone on the list wants to read
everything anyway, certainly not me, and messages irrelevant or
unintelligible to you are just the price of being on a list.)  

Most to the point: It's often not obvious at all that any particular
answer was definitive, especially if there is conflicting advice. 

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

Bob Hammond

Also, I 
checked the FAQ and found that I should reply to say that the problem is

solved:

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Don't walk away from the thread you started Continuing or closing a 
thread you started is important, especially by answering secondary 
questions and by reporting what solved your problem. You can then thank 
those who tried to help."
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I would have thought that filling everyone's inbox when all that I have 
to say is "Thanks" would be frowned upon but I'm happy to express 
gratitude publicly rather than privately as I had been doing.


*
*   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/



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