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]

From |
William Buchanan <william@williambuchanan.net> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results? |

Date |
Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:18:58 -0700 |

You might be able to investigate how things are being processed by using -set trace on-. On Apr 30, 2013, at 6:13 PM, William Sankey <wsankey@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for the help, I wonder what the command is processing > without the commas? > > Anyway, I will look to the documentation. Thanks again, > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Sergiy Radyakin <serjradyakin@gmail.com> wrote: >> Documentation for inlist says that for strings only 10 arguments are supported. >> So the following is a problem: >> >> . di inlist("208","150","151", "157", "162", "183","191", "196", >> "197", "198", "199", "200", "208") >> expression too long >> r(130); >> >> Using spaces instead of commas prevents an error, but does not mean >> that Stata is working correctly, it merely stops complaining: >> >> . di inlist("208","150","151", "157", "162", "183","191", "196", "197" >> "198" "199" "200" "208") >> 0 >> >> Using -destring- on the variable you will get better results on list >> search of the reals: >> . di inlist(208, 150, 151, 157, 162, 183, 191, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 208) >> 1 >> >> Using two lists in the program is an additional source of a potential >> error. What if you now need to add an additional diagnosis, e.g. 301, >> or need to change 191 to 192? >> >> Best, Sergiy >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:56 PM, William Buchanan >> <william@williambuchanan.net> wrote: >>> You have statements that are not equivalent. Check the commas in your first statement. >>> >>> HTH, >>> Billy >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 14:37, William Sankey <wsankey@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Good afternoon Statalist, >>>> >>>> I have two different macros operating in different parts of my code, I >>>> developed the first macro some time ago and the second macro recently. >>>> I believed these two macros would give me the same output, however, >>>> the first macro is producing far fewer observations than the second. >>>> It seems that the first is misclassifying observations and though I >>>> cannot figure out why. >>>> >>>> Any help in deciphering what it is about the first macro that would >>>> produce fewer observations would be much appreciated. >>>> >>>> The first macro set: >>>> >>>> ***Cancer >>>> >>>> local ICD2 "Diagnosis1 Diagnosis2 Diagnosis3 Diagnosis4 Diagnosis5" >>>> foreach X of varlist `ICD2' { >>>> replace cancer =1 if inlist(`X',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191" >>>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208") >>>> } >>>> >>>> local PMT2 "Diagnosis_PMT_A_1 Diagnosis_PMT_A_2 Diagnosis_PMT_B_1 >>>> Diagnosis_PMT_B_2 Diagnosis_PMT_C_1 Diagnosis_PMT_C_2" >>>> >>>> foreach X of varlist `PMT2' { >>>> replace cancer =1 if inlist(`X',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191" >>>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208") >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> The second macro set: >>>> >>>> gen DIAG_1 = Diagnosis1 >>>> gen DIAG_2 = Diagnosis2 >>>> gen DIAG_3 = Diagnosis3 >>>> gen DIAG_4 = Diagnosis4 >>>> gen DIAG_5 = Diagnosis5 >>>> >>>> gen ALT_A_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_A_1 >>>> gen ALT_A_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_A_2 >>>> gen ALT_B_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_B_1 >>>> gen ALT_B_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_B_2 >>>> gen ALT_C_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_C_1 >>>> gen ALT_C_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_C_2 >>>> ***Cancer >>>> >>>> forval j = 1/5 { >>>> replace cancer=1 /// >>>> if inlist(DIAG_`j',"150","151", "157", "162", "183","191", >>>> "196", "197" "198" "199" "200" "208") >>>> } >>>> >>>> local letter "A B C" >>>> foreach i in `letter' { >>>> forval e = 1/2 { >>>> replace cancer=1 /// >>>> if (inlist(ALT_`i'_`e',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191" >>>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208") >>>> } >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Will >>>> >>>> -- >>>> William J. Sankey >>>> Johns Hopkins University >>>> MA Public Policy '12 >>>> * >>>> * 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/ >>> >>> * >>> * 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/ >> * >> * 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/ > > > > -- > William J. Sankey > Johns Hopkins University > MA Public Policy '12 > * > * 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/ * * 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/

**References**:**st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?***From:*William Sankey <wsankey@gmail.com>

**Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?***From:*William Buchanan <william@williambuchanan.net>

**Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?***From:*Sergiy Radyakin <serjradyakin@gmail.com>

**Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?***From:*William Sankey <wsankey@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Working with the name of the do file** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?** - Next by thread:
**st: Working with the name of the do file** - Index(es):