This underlines to me that my own first reply confuses quite
different problems. Joel wants a listing
if any variable is not missing,
not
only if all variables are not missing.
Phil has indicated the best -egen- route: my first reply
indicates an alternative from first principles. Sorry about
any confusion.
Nick
[email protected]
Phil Schumm
> On Jan 17, 2007, at 2:01 PM, Joel J. Adamson wrote:
> > I want to list a set of variables, only if an observation is not
> > missing for the variables in question. We usually handle this by
> > constructing a small logical expression:
> >
> > l med1 med2 if (med1~=.|med2~=.)
> >
> > However, if I have six, or a hundred "med" variables (med*), it
> > would be easier (less error-prone) to type:
> >
> > l med* if |(med*~=.)
> >
> > Where the "|" before the "(" maps the operation onto the expanded
> > list of variables.
>
>
> egen foo = rownonmiss(med*), [strok]
> li med* if foo
>
>
> where the -strok- option is necessary if one or more vars are
> of type
> string.
*
* 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/
