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

st: RE: re: sureg with unbalanced data

From   "Nick Cox" <[email protected]>
To   <[email protected]>
Subject   st: RE: re: sureg with unbalanced data
Date   Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:28:16 +0100

It is not that surprising at all. 

To clarify for a broad audience: 

Many articles in the Stata Journal do not 
have associated software, even if they 
are largely or entirely about using Stata 

Associated software is usually of the 
form of .ado files and the associated 
.hlp files. An important principle here 
is that software published via the Stata 
Journal should as far as possible be
comprehensible without further documentation 
to those who do not have access to the
Stata Journal itself. Naturally the whole
point about a help file is to provide 
the minimal documentation required to 
understand the associated programs (and
sometimes more). 

Incidentally, the preferred way 
to download such files for use with 
Stata should always be through Stata, 
starting with a -search-. Stata knows 
about its own .hlp files (unlike many 
others Windows applications in particular)
and it also has sound ideas about where 
to install them. (That said, there may 
be firewall or other reasons why you 
are obliged to download through the 

I can see the point about the code 
in Allen McDowell's article. Someone 
might want to start from that and modify 
to suit their circumstances. However, 
Allen's explanations are not phrased 
in terms of .do files. If the Stata 
Journal were to start publishing 
code fragments as .do files, there 
would be disadvantages: 

(1) possibly lots of little .do files
that no one really wants 

(2) undocumented files, and at least 
some one expecting or demanding support
for them. 

I don't think we are dogmatic about this. 
We'd listen to a case for including 
(substantial) code fragments as ancillary 
files downloadable from the Stata Journal 
website. But on the whole, authors' typical
do files would not be much more portable
or useful to others than users' typical do files. 

[email protected] 

Kit Baum
> Eric points out that the link
> does not work. Surprisingly, this article does NOT have any 
> associated 
> software. It would certainly be nice if at least the do-files 
> quoted in the article were provided in machine readable form!
> You can examine what is available by looking at stata.toc in
> which indeed shows no st0079.
> Just goes to show how useful it is for you (or your 
> university library) 
> to spring for a subscription to that excellent publication, the Stata 
> Journal!

*   For searches and help try:

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