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]

RE: st: RE: Figure out in which do-file an error occurred

From   Nick Cox <>
To   "''" <>
Subject   RE: st: RE: Figure out in which do-file an error occurred
Date   Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:16:14 +0000

I see. Still no reason why you cannot pepper your master-do file with -display- statements. 

How far it helps I wouldn't know. 


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Oliver Jones
Sent: 08 March 2012 10:22
Subject: Re: st: RE: Figure out in which do-file an error occurred

the -forval- would not do the job for two reasons.

1. I call various "sub-sub-dofiles" from within the sub-dofiles.
2. (and more important) I was too simplistic in my description of
    my problem. My sub-dofiles are actucally not called like that.
    They have some meaningful names and before I call them I put
    a couple of commentary lines with a brief description of them.
    Thus looping over them would not work out.


Am 07.03.2012 20:13, schrieb Nick Cox:
> You don't need to edit each file. You can change your master file to
> forval i = 1/5 {
>          di "beginning file `i'"
>          do sub-dofile-`i'
> }
> Nick
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Brendan Halpin<>  wrote:
>> A simple but tedious strategy would be to put a line like this
>> -di "Beginning"-
>> at the start of each do-file.
>> If you run the master file, it will stop at the first error and you can
>> backtrack to the most recent "Beginning" statement.
>> I cope with large projects by using "make", a utility which comes with
>> Unix systems. Alternatively, you could use a script file (something.bat
>> in Windows, a shell-script file in Unix-like systems). This involves
>> using Stata in batch mode. However, since Stata batch jobs tell the
>> operating system they have completed successfully even if there has been
>> a Stata error, these script files will continue regardless even when
>> an error occurs in an earlier do-file. I wrap the call to Stata in a
>> script file which searches the log file for errors. I describe the
>> system in more detail at

*   For searches and help try:

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