On the contrary, it is very easy to imagine that getting
your data into analyzable shape first takes a great deal
of effort.
Questions are easiest to answer if we can see the simplest
cut-down version of your data that shows the problem, e.g.
a listing of 6 or so variables and 12 or so observations,
and so idea whatever naming scheme has been used.
Nick
[email protected]
Clare L Maxwell
> Hello again, Eric. And thanks again.
>
> >No, foreach won't work that way. Here's an example using forvalues
> >that might help:
> >
> > +-----------------------------------------------------------+
> > | mo1 day1 yr1 mo2 day2 yr2 mo3 day3 yr3 |
> > |-----------------------------------------------------------|
> > 1. | 1 1 1960 12 25 1965 6 7 1968 |
> > 2. | 11 12 1907 6 29 1957 3 3 2002 |
> > +-----------------------------------------------------------+
> >
> >. forvalues i=1/3 {
> > 2. gen date`i' = mdy(mo`i', day`i', yr`i')
> > 3. }
>
> Sadly, the variables are not strictly numbered, and it would not be a
> good idea to rename them, especially in the other tasks I do with
> series of coordinated variables. In your first letter, you mentioned
> that people might find it easier to respond if I gave a better
> description of the problem. Can you think how this might be put so
> that old hand Stata data manipulators would know what I am talking
> about? Sorry that this is not exactly a statistical problem. I need
> to get my data into analyzable shape first, which seems to take so
> much more effort than one would imagine.
>
*
* 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/
