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

RE: st: RE: -for- versus -for each-

From   Kieran McCaul <>
To   "''" <>
Subject   RE: st: RE: -for- versus -for each-
Date   Fri, 9 Apr 2004 12:28:41 +0800

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Watson []
Sent: Thursday, 8 April 2004 6:01 PM
To: Nick Cox
Subject: Re: st: RE: -for- versus -for each-

Dear Nick,

  Thanks for your very illuminating discussion on -for each-. I agree
  that it's a parallel list, not a nested list, issue. And you're
  right, the long-windedness was my concern. Unfortunately, my first
  posting was chopped (hence the very abrupt opening). It was
  originally sent as:

  "I realise that -for- has fallen out of favour in recent years (and
  no longer merits inclusion in the Stata manual) but I can't seem to
  get -for each- to replicate some neat aspects of -for- . I've read
  the entries in the manual and Nick Cox's piece in SJ 2 (2) but
  cannot find an answer."

  The emphasis here was on `neat'. With -for- one can execute up to 3
  processes with a single line of code, typed in on the command line
  in one go.  For that reason, I fall back on it constantly.  That's
  the facility I was looking for with -for each-, but couldn't find
  it.  Certainly, in an ado file I'd be more inclined to set up a proper
  looping structure with macros, but that's a different proposition.
  In that context, -for each- is a nice replacement to a while loop.

  Thanks for the reference to the lists article in SJ3(2). I'll follow
  it up.

Kind regards,

Ian Watson
Senior Researcher
University of Sydney
NSW 2006

*   For searches and help try:
*   For searches and help try:

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