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

From |
jjc.li@utoronto.ca |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

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

Date |
Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:10:07 -0400 |

Hi, First, I corrected all the typo.

}

- } - if _rc { - di as error "nlsur`eqn' returned " _rc = di as error "nlsurwellbehav returned " _rc nlsurwellbehav returned 111 - di as error "verify that nlsur`eqn' is a function evaluator program" = di as error "verify that nlsurwellbehav is a function evaluator program" verify that nlsurwellbehav is a function evaluator program - exit _rc } }

end nlsur --- r(111);

replace `lnc'=`a'*`lne'+`b'*``lnpe'*`lne'' In my previous codes I defined them as: `lnc'=`a'*`lne'+`b'*`lnpe'*`lne' Does it cause the r(111)? Jingjing Quoting Eva Poen <eva.poen@gmail.com>:

I have to correct myself in the sense that -trace- will show, with -nlsur-, details of the program used. It will not, however, pass on the error message, or the return code, of the program. That makes it more difficult to pinpoint the error. The same happens if -set trace on- is used inside the program, irrespective of -tracedepth-. When the program is invoked directly (without -nlsur-), the error messages will relate to actual problem inside the program. The program will, however, change the data if it runs successfully; therefore, copies of the dependent variables should be used. Eva 2009/3/15 Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>: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* * 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>

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

**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>

**RE: 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:
**RE: st: RE: Return r(111) this time** - Next by Date:
**RE: st: RE: Return r(111) this time** - 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 1996–2014 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |