Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.

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

From |
"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10? |

Date |
Wed, 7 Apr 2010 18:55:39 +0100 |

I don't worry that much about taxonomy, but r(varlist) is, or is equivalent to, a local macro in at least two senses: 1. You define it via -return local-. 2. You can invoke it via `r(varlist)'. It is not a local macro in the sense that -macro list- won't list it. -return list- will. Also, any r-class program will zap all existing r-class results. To zap a local macro, you have to blank it out explicitly. Loosely similar points could be made about e() stuff. In Stata, I think the word "function" is best reserved for things so named in the help for -functions-. Also calling -egen- functions "functions" was arguably a misleading choice, but there are only so many words that would fit well. Calling all sorts of other things functions -- not least commands, as often done on this list -- does no great harm, but does not much help communication either. The most congenial terminology is usually that of the software one happens to know best! Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk Michael I. Lichter Thank you, Nick and Martin. I set myself up for a sucker punch in my last message. Still, even if single quotes can evaluate lots of different kinds of things, and r(varlist) is not a local macro kind of thing, what kind of thing *is* r(varlist) and what are the rules governing its use? Is it a function returning the contents of a macro, or something else? (And what are the other kinds of returns, like e(b), which acts more like a matrix than like the contents of a matrix, and yet does not support subscripting?) Nick, thanks for the tip about your tips book. I do have a copy ... if only I could find it ... :( * * 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/

**References**:**st: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Michael I. Lichter" <mlichter@buffalo.edu>

**st: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>

**st: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>

**st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>

**Re: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Michael I. Lichter" <mlichter@buffalo.edu>

**RE: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Martin Weiss" <martin.weiss1@gmx.de>

**Re: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Michael I. Lichter" <mlichter@buffalo.edu>

**RE: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**Re: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?***From:*"Michael I. Lichter" <mlichter@buffalo.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Presenting variation in risk over time using stcrreg** - Next by Date:
**st: missing output in ml** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?** - Next by thread:
**RE: st: RE: RE: RE: Undocumented limitation of describe (and hence -ds-) in Stata 10?** - Index(es):