Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, is already up and running.

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

st: RE: RE: how to use for* loops "noisily"?

From   "Martin Weiss" <>
To   <>
Subject   st: RE: RE: how to use for* loops "noisily"?
Date   Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:21:02 +0200


Also note -profiler-, btw.


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of David Radwin
Sent: Donnerstag, 29. Juli 2010 18:18
Subject: st: RE: how to use for* loops "noisily"?


You might try using -set tracedepth 1- after -set trace on- to keep the 
output to a reasonable level within loops.

David Radwin
Research Associate
MPR Associates, Inc.
2150 Shattuck Ave., Suite 800
Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone: 510-849-4942
Fax: 510-849-0794

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:owner-
>] On Behalf Of László Sándor
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:06 AM
> To:
> Subject: st: how to use for* loops "noisily"?
> Hi all,
> Sorry I could not google this down (or find in the manual): I am
> trying to use some efficient code, much like the advice of Kit Baum's
> books and Stata tips, but if I use loops (-foreach- or -forvalues-)
> for everything (cases, specification, restrictions etc.), I rarely see
> anything going on, only estimation results are coded to get
> posted/displayed in this case [by Stata], and the occasional (=
> omnipresent) error message.
> I experimented with turning -set trace on-, but it did more harm than
> good. Some clumsy bracketing into -noisily- chunks did not help
> either.
> Is there something to do if I'd like to run this do-file as a regular
> do-file for all commands, in or out of loops?
> Thanks,
> Laszlo

*   For searches and help try:

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index