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, statalist.org is already up and running.


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

Re: st: Optimizing recoding procedures


From   Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Optimizing recoding procedures
Date   Wed, 12 Dec 2012 16:49:31 +0000

replace x = x * !(a&b&c&d)

Nick

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Jeph Herrin <stata@spandrel.net> wrote:
> I thought of that, but didn't want to assume. However, if true, and all are
> nonmissing, then an even terser line would be
>
>  replace x = 0 if a&b&c&d
>
> or even
>
>  replace x = cond(a&b&c&d,0,x)
>
>
>
>
> On 12/12/2012 9:55 AM, Nick Cox wrote:
>>
>> Wish I'd thought of that.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM, David Radwin <dradwin@mprinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's not much of an improvement, but if a, b, c, and d all are all dummy
>>> (0/1) variables:
>>>
>>> replace x = 0 if a + b + c + d == 4
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Thomas Lux <tholux2000@yahoo.de>
>>
>>>>>>> Thank you very much, Nick!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The mentioned statement makes indeed no sense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The statement should be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> replace x = 0 if a==1 & b==1 & c==1 & d==1 & d==1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a way to do this in a shorter way?
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index