AW: st: AW: -findname- available from SSC

["Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>]

<> 

"I don't think it is ever going to be true that @ == missing"




Yes, how embarassing, I helped debug the thing and did not realise the full meaning of the example 
- findname, all(@ == int(@))-, but now the penny has dropped. Thanks to Maarten and Nick for clarifying, then.


HTH
Martin


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] Im Auftrag von Nick Cox
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. März 2010 16:54
An: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Betreff: RE: st: AW: -findname- available from SSC

I don't think it is ever going to be true that @ == missing(@). 

It's true that if an indicator were possibly ever one of .a ... .z that you would need syntax to catch that, and 

@ == 0 | @ == 1 | missing(@) 

and 

@ == 0 | @ == 1 | @ >= . 

would be two ways of so doing. 

For those bemused by the line noise of @ signs, @ is used in calls to -findname- to mean "any variable". 

-findname- is a user-written program from SSC, as the posting title implies. 

Nick 
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 

Maarten buis

--- Martin Weiss wrote:
> Could a dummy be "extended missing", as well?
>
> *************
> clear*
> set obs 2
> gen byte mydummy=.a
> replace mydummy=. in 2
> findname, all(@ == 0 | @ == 1 | @ == .)
> *************
> 
> Would the syntax -findname, all(@ == 0 | @ == 1 | @ == missing(@))- 
> cover that, or rather: should it?

I don't think so, a program should just do exactly what you tell it 
to do. So if you wanted to include extended missing values you should 
have written: 

findname, all(@ == 0 | @ == 1 | @ >= .)


*
*   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/