Re: Re: st: no room to add more double literals

[Sergiy Radyakin <serjradyakin@gmail.com>]

Hello Kit,

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Christopher Baum <kit.baum@bc.edu> wrote:
> <>
> On Jan 18, 2011, at 2:33 AM, Sergiy wrote:
>
>> What is the best way to define, e.g. 100000x1 matrix in the Mata code?
>> (Another software is writing the Mata program, so I am not concerned
>> about the amount of labor).
>
> Why not just define the matrix (or the vec() of the matrix) as a Stata variable and view it in Mata?


Because it goes against the encapsulation paradigm ("a language
mechanism for restricting access
to some of the object's components" -- Wikipedia).

My two other observations are:
1) if I try to input a matrix with 1,1,1,1\2,2,2,2\3,3,3,3.... it hits
the limit as well with a different error
message, but still pretty soon to be practical.

2) if I run the original commands without wrapping them into a
function - everything works well
(presumably because the literals are not stored, but rather executed
right away).


I have found by now the response of David Drukker from 2007 regarding
the problem:
http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2007-08/msg00149.html
Since I need the program to be compatible with Stata 9, further
updates will not be applicable.

Thank you, Sergiy



>
> Kit
>
> Kit Baum   |   Boston College Economics & DIW Berlin   |   http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html
>                              An Introduction to Stata Programming  |   http://www.stata-press.com/books/isp.html
>   An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata  |   http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html
>
>
> *
> *   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/