I suggest we assign everyone's first last word to .a, the second last
word to .b, the third to .c and so on...
I, for one, have found this entire discussion fascinating and I have
learned a fair bit about some implications of missing values I had not
sufficiently appreciated previously. I will be much more rigorous in
coding practices to include & !mi(x) in my if statements in the
future.
I wonder if it would be helpful to give some additional thought to
documentation in the -help missing- section to discuss some of the
implications and "best practices" around the handling of missings that
is not self-evident just from reading the technical details. While
some users would prefer not to have warnings about missings that are
included in if x>42, perhaps Stata could have a -set nanny on- option
that would give increased warnings in situations known to be potential
problem areas for users. Nanny mode might make sure more of us wore
our hats and mittens on cold days...
DC Elliott
*
* 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/
