Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

st: RE: Re: nostop in do files

From   "Nick Cox" <[email protected]>
To   <[email protected]>
Subject   st: RE: Re: nostop in do files
Date   Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:37:19 -0000

A different issue is why you would or should ever want to do this. 

I don't think I've ever used ", nostop" in my Stata life. 

If a particular command might not work, but that wouldn't be 
problematic for whatever follows, the best way to automate that 
is to use -capture- locally. The problem is that under 
a file-wide -, nostop- Stata would plough on past errors I 
didn't envisage just as readily as past those I did envisage. 

The example at [U] 19.1.4 seems to support this point. 
While illustrating the syntax, it shows a case in which the 
-, nostop- was a bad idea. An early mistake meant that nothing else
worked properly. 

Of course, this is just something concocted for the manual. 

I'd be interested to hear of convincing real (or realistic) 
examples, or explanations, of how -, nostop- is ever sensible. 

[email protected] 

Scott Merryman
> One way, at least for directly clicking on the do file (in 
> Windows), is to edit
> the file association for Stata do files.
> My Computer -> View -> Folder Options -> File Types -> edit 
> Stata do file ->
> edit open task -> then change the "Application used to 
> perform action:" to
> C:\Stata8\wsestata.exe /m1 do  %1 ,nostop
> This will attach the -nostop- option to all do files that are 
> opened by clicking
> on them.

Tim Wade

> > I am using v. 8 on Windows 2000--
> >
> > I hope this question isn't too stupid, but I searched
> > archives, faq's, and manuals.
> >
> > I usually run do files by either clicking on them
> > directly, or opening them from Stata and clicking the
> > run icon. Because of this, I find it inconvenient to
> > type "do mydofile, nostop", when I want to prevent do
> > files from stopping in the event of an error. Is there
> > a way to specify this in the do file? I know I could
> > have a second do file call it up, but would rather not
> > do this. Including the line "do mydofile, nostop" at
> > the top of the do file results in errors as well
> > (after the program runs once), or endless loops (as
> > would be expected!) 

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index