[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
RE: st: looping over parallel lists - is there a alternative to "for"?
As has been said, -for- divides the world (like
Marmite, if you know what that is).
The two camps are, naturally, "for" and "against".
Once you have seen the light on -forvalues- and -foreach-,
you never want to go back.
> I suppose you can have three globals and then have one loop to loop
> through them? Some samples can be found in C Baum's "A little bit of
> Stata programming goes a long way ..."
> I quite like the -for- command as well, sometimes I only want to loop
> one line of command and using commands like -forvalue- and -foreach-
> gets a bit complicated. And speaking for myself, using -for- would
> save me from making typos like using ) instead of }.
> On 3/16/06, Gawrich Stefan <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I do a lot of routine or repetitive data analysis and use
> loops and lists
> > frequently (btw, thx to Nick Cox, his "How to fact lists
> with fortitude"
> > helped me a lot).
> > I'm wondering why the "for"-command is officialy out of
> date in Stata while
> > one of it's best features - the use of parallel lists -
> can't be done
> > otherwise. Or am I missing something?
> > One example: I routinely map ten different diseases with
> tmap and save the
> > maps as a graphic file.
> > for var var1-var10 \ any "Disease1" "Disease2" [...] \ any
> > "Filename2" [...] : ///
> > tmap choro X, id(county) map("county-Coordinates.dta")
> title("Y") \ graph
> > export "Z.png", replace
> > In this example each graph is determined by something like
> a 3-tuple of
> > variable, title and saving-filename.
> > This is just basic code, in real life the code blows up and
> becomes hard to
> > read, as we all know, "for" has some disadvantages.
> > So if it can be done in a more structured manner, I would
> like to know...
* For searches and help try: