Yes and no. Sorry to repeat the point, but you
put the blame in the wrong place again
in talking of the inefficiency of -while-,
which is just a framework and not to blame
for what's inside.
The ineffiency of -while- is in going (e.g.)
local i = 1
while `i' < 1000 {
...
local i = `i' + 1
}
rather than (say)
forval i = 1/1000 {
...
}
-- although note that not every -while-
can be made a -forval- --
but that's small beer compared with the
possible inefficiency of what the user
puts within the loop, which is the issue here.
Nick
[email protected]
Subhankar Nayak
>
> Yes, that's a very interesting point that I had missed.
> I now see why -while- is so inefficient: it reads such a huge
> fraction of
> unneccesary observations. I can avoid that by more efficient
> treatment of
> the observation: avoid reading all those unneccesary observations
> repeatedly.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
