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 at the end of May, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


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

Re: st: Stata 11 v Stata 12: difference in batch mode behaviour


From   Phil Schumm <pschumm@uchicago.edu>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Stata 11 v Stata 12: difference in batch mode behaviour
Date   Wed, 5 Oct 2011 11:05:56 -0500

On Oct 5, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Dave Ewart wrote:
> I noticed when testing Stata 12 that a previously-working batch job was failing.
> 
> The old job was launched as follows:
> 
>    stata11 -b something.do
> 
> and it put correct output into something.log
> 
> But,
> 
>    stata12 -b something.do
> 
> fails and puts output like the following into an output logfile called stata.log:
> 
>       . doedit something.do 
>       unrecognized command:  doedit
>       r(199);
> 
> Very strange?  It's launching 'doedit' against the supplied DO file?


I can't explain why this change was made, but I can confirm that it was also made in Stata for OS X.  FWIW, I use a thin wrapper to call Stata in batch mode; this is because Stata on OS X (in batch mode) doesn't yield a non-zero return code following an error, and the wrapper addresses that problem.  When I upgraded to Stata 12, I modified that wrapper to insert "do" automatically when Stata is called with a single do-file name.


-- Phil


*
*   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   |   Site index