I've got to say that I don't regard this as a bug.
-lookfor- does not claim to support options, nor does it do that. So,
there's no inconsistency either way in that respect.
Nor do I think that there is a good reason to ban commas as input, if
that were to be suggested. Commas can be part of strings, no question.
As -lookfor- behaves reasonably even when Jeph treats it not quite as
intended, wherein lies the bug?
Nick
[email protected]
Jeph Herrin
For what it's worth, I was surprised to discover that
lookfor myvar, fullnames
produces the same result as
lookfor myvar fullnames
That is, if you add any options to -lookfor-, it ignores the
comma and treats the options as search strings.
On the one hand, the documentation clearly indicates there
are no options. On the other, it often happens that I try
options that I think might work and expect Stata complain
if they are invalid.
In this case, I abbreviated -fullnames- to -fu-, and was finding
variables that in no way matched -myvar-. Took me a while to
puzzle out.
*
* 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/
