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

Re: st: Stata 9 Wish List

From   Daniel Egan <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: Stata 9 Wish List
Date   Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:23:13 -0400

I completely agree - I had the misfortune recently to have to use SAS
to man-handle some huge datasets. I likewise used SPSS a while ago,
and they are both horribly inefficient from a users standpoint.
Consider what I get by typing
bys A: sum, d
versus what you would have to write in SAS (ugh) to get the same
amount of info.

That said, because of this, I would love it if Stata got serious
somehow about handling big datasets.  I am pretty ambivalent about
Stata being better on integrating user-written routines into official
program. I realize that it's probably a pain to Stata Inc, but I do
notice that until I have a real need to have something be done, I
don't go looking for it in SSC or the Archives - I look in the command
helps. So sometimes, because I am lazy, I miss out on some cool
routines. Also though, having Stata be more integrated would emphasize
the efficiency which I noted above. Consider:

log using boo, replace
log close
log2html boo.smcl, blah

I could just say
log using doo.html, html (blah)
log close

All in all, my complaints about Stata are those of a petulant lazy
child - and in some ways, I complain because I appreciate Stata enough
that I feel beholden to 1) spread the gospel and 2) make it better, as
I wish it were.

Ok, its Sunday......

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:28:42 -0400, [email protected]
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm one of those people who feels that Stata in its current version has come
> very close to perfect!  My concern is that with too many "improvements" it
> will migrate to the land of bloatware.  I prefer to see Stata stay lean and
> mean.  In particular, I would hate to see it start to look like SPSS, a
> package I fled many years ago.
> I do have one tiny wish for change, though.  I often want to re-examine the
> output of a run, and I launch Stata by double-clicking the icon of the smcl
> file it produced.  Problem is, the *same* icon is also used for do-files (at
> least in the Windows version).  It is easy to hit the do-file by mistake,
> causing the analysis to be re-run.  If the analysis is quick, and if the data
> files it uses have not changed since the original run, this is a trivial
> problem.  But in the opposite circumstance, I then have to abort the run, drag
> out my backups and restore the smcl-file, which has been clobbered by the -log
> using foo, replace- command in the do file.  If the do-file also modifies any
> of the data sets, then these too must be restored from backups.
> All that is needed to avoid this is a distinct icon for smcl-files.  There are
> distinct icons for .dta and .gph files, so it can't be hard to do.
> Pax vobiscum.
> Clyde Schechter
> Dept. of Family & Social Medicine
> Albert Einstein College of Medicine
> Bronx, NY, USA
> *
> *   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