Statalist


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: RE: saving local macros


From   "Ashim Kapoor" <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: RE: saving local macros
Date   Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:39:49 +0530

I meant the answer whethere a level is a buy or a sell depends on the
macros / dataset. I want everyone to see this, I want to hide the
algorithm.

It's late in the night here and maybe I am tired. I felt my prev email
was not clear.

Thank you,
Ashim.

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Ashim Kapoor <[email protected]> wrote:
> Surely I can use the macros and the data independently of my code.
>
> For example, my code may have an algorithm deciding a buy or a sell
> level for a stock. Now this is stored in the macros and the datafile.
> I do want people to see the buy or sell levels. I dont want them
> seeing the do file.
>
> I hope I am clear now.
>
> Thank you,
> Ashim.
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This isn't clear to me either. There is no "using the macros and the
>> dataset to print the output" independently of code containing the
>> macros.
>>
>> My comment on payment was facetious, if not rhetorical. I am sorry you
>> didn't realise that.
>>
>> However, I do feel much more reluctance to help other people develop
>> code that is going to be not only private but proprietary. Why should I
>> do that? I would much rather feel that in principle I was contributing
>> to something easily accessible. Stata isn't incompatible with users
>> writing Stata code for private or institutional gain, clearly, but
>> Statalist does function best when closest to full and free exchange of
>> information.
>>
>> As for my own work, I regard putting ideas, discussion and tested code
>> in the public domain as one of the best things I can do for my
>> university. It's an obligation of mine to spread my work!
>>
>> As far as your problem is concerned, I think you are in a cleft stick of
>> your own devising, as the secrecy you feel compelled to seek prevents
>> you making really clear in Stata terms what your problem is.
>>
>> These are personal views. Others must speak for themselves.
>>
>> Nick
>> [email protected]
>>
>> Ashim Kapoor
>>
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> I don't think I was clear. Here is what I do :
>> 1. Run sometests and produce local macros and a small output dataset.
>> 2. Use the macros and dataset to print the output.
>>
>> so (2) is ALL I want any1 to see. I am not worried about encrypting
>> the local macros, only that I can't let anyone else see the do file i
>> am running to produce my macro.
>>
>> Is'nt is much easier to save the macros / save the dataset and send it
>> to someone to see the output whethere in HTML or smcl.
>> Why risk someone decrypting my file ?
>>
>> It's not even my IDEA, I just program it but I don't think my boss
>> will like it if i put it on the internet.
>>
>> Is'nt everyone who comes to this list  working for a company or a
>> university ? Would'nt their university be really upset if they gave
>> out their bosses unpublished work on the internet and fire them on the
>> spot ? Do those people pay for these services  ? Oh, A small number of
>> times I have answered questions, should I expect to be paid for that ?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Ashim.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Sorry, Ashim, but I really don't understand your comments here.
>>>
>>> First off, local macros are useless unless used in some code. Whether
>>> that use is interactive, via a do file, or via a program is up to you.
>>>
>>> If you want to be absolutely sure that certain collaborators, and only
>>> those collaborators, see that code, then you need to send it
>> encrypted.
>>> That would apply to a do file or a program, and does not _itself_ rule
>>> out do files.
>>>
>>> Second, saving macros in the data file runs into the same issues. You
>>> would need to encrypt that too, as any Stata user with the same
>> version
>>> could in principle read your data file too.
>>>
>>> In short, wanting absolute security seems to me orthogonal to all
>> other
>>> details here.
>>>
>>> For myself, I always remember what Howard Aiken said. Don't worry
>> about
>>> people stealing your ideas; if they're any good, you will have to ram
>>> them down their throats.
>>>
>>> Nick
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> P.S. If you are developing proprietary code, why do you expect free
>>> help? Shouldn't you offer to pay us?
>>>
>>> Ashim Kapoor
>>>
>>> Well in my opinion the do file won't do. Simply because the 1st half
>>> of my code is proprietary, I dont wnat any1 to see it. I do wnat them
>>> to USE the local macros / dataset at the end of the 1st half. Maybe I
>>> am more clear now.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Nick Cox <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A matrix could not be used for macros with string content. (Strictly,
>>>> all macros are strings, but clearly some have numeric content.)
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> Philipp Rehm
>>>>
>>>> I think that's what do-files are for.
>>>>
>>>> Nevertheless: how about building up a matrix which contains the local
>>>> macros you encounter, which you then save into a variable? You could
>>>> then recover the local macros with -levelsof-, for example.
>>>>
>>>> But I guess a do-file is the more straightforward approach...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ashim Kapoor wrote:
>>>>> I somehow feel that you can save local macros in a way other than
>>>>> using -notes- can you ??
>>
>> *
>> *   For searches and help try:
>> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
>> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
>> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>>
>
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/



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