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

From |
"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: RE: Return r(111) this time |

Date |
Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:21:57 -0000 |

I've not tried it with -nlsur- but in general it is true that you may need to -set tracedepth- too. Alternatively, and probably better here, insert -set trace on- at the beginning of your own program. Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk Eva Poen Nick spotted two important points which I overlooked: > scalar `aqq'=at'[1,5] should be scalar `aqq'=`at'[1,5] Also, the if condition has to be added at the end of the program: replace `lnc' = .... `if' replace `sl' = .... `if' replace `sk' = .... `if' replace `sm' = .... `if' where ... stands for the very long expressions in Jingjing's code. Concerning -trace- and -nlsur-: From my (quick) experiments it appeared that -trace- will only show details of the program if it is invoked directly (i.e. without -nlsur-). In order to to that, one has to be careful to use copies of the dependent variables, since the program will change those variables if running successfully. 2009/3/15 Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>: > scalar `aqq'=at'[1,5] > > is another typo. I didn't try finding any others. > > Do please find out about -set trace-, today! > > P.S. A bug here is that your program allows -if- but ignores it. * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: RE: Return r(111) this time***From:*Eva Poen <eva.poen@gmail.com>

**References**:**Re: st: Return code 199 after redoing the example in stata reference***From:*Kit Baum <baum@bc.edu>

**Re: st: Return code 199 after redoing the example in stata reference***From:*Eva Poen <eva.poen@gmail.com>

**st: Return r(111) this time***From:*jjc.li@utoronto.ca

**st: RE: Return r(111) this time***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**Re: st: RE: Return r(111) this time***From:*Eva Poen <eva.poen@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: re: Is there a similar output command as outreg for Summary?** - Next by Date:
**st: re: Is there a similar output command as outreg for Summary?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Return r(111) this time** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Return r(111) this time** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |