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]
st: RE: reshape command ---listing all the variables changing over time?
From
"Martin Weiss" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: reshape command ---listing all the variables changing over time?
Date
Thu, 13 May 2010 23:44:57 +0200
<>
***********
ssc d panels
***********
may be helpful to check for constant variables within panels.
What kind of dataset is it that features 1,500 variables that you want to
-reshape- to wide? I would say that this is not a normal situation when
applying the -reshape- command. You will end up with a dataset with slightly
more than 1,500*(number of distinct values of j) variables. Is that really
intended? Stata is fond of the "long" format for most analyses...
HTH
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Amanda Fu
Sent: Donnerstag, 13. Mai 2010 21:57
To: [email protected]
Subject: st:reshape command ---listing all the variables changing over time?
Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone could help me with a problem I met when
using --reshape--command.
When I tried to reshape a data set from long version to wide version,
I find I need to list all the variables that are not constant in the
--reshape--command. Suppose the data set has 1500 variables changing
over time and 100 constant variables.
------------------------------------------------------------
. reshape wide x1-x1500, i(id) j(wave)
------------------------------------------------------------
If I miss any of the variables changing over time, the reshape command
will give error message such as "variable XXXX not constant " and will
stop working. But it is so frustrating to separate the constant
variables and not-constant variables and list all of the latter ones
in the reshape command.
What I used to do is just to drop all the unnecessary variables from
the data set before reshape to reduce the work load here.
May I know if there is any more efficient way to deal with this problem?
Thanks for your time!
Sincerely,
Mandy
*
* 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/