Comments on: Do-file rules — one suggestion

By: Do-file rules, revisited | The Stata Things

Do-file rules, revisited | The Stata Things — Tue, 22 May 2012 19:06:08 +0000

[...] (typeof(addthis_share) == "undefined"){ addthis_share = [];}Back in 2009 I wrote this post, detailing what at the time I thought would be a good way to write do-files. Some of the ideas [...]

By: Consider ado-files | A Stata Mind

Consider ado-files | A Stata Mind — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:12:18 +0000

[...] A while ago I suggested a particular do-file architecture that seemed to work well for me at the time. The post is here. [...]

By: Gabi Huiber

Gabi Huiber — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:05:30 +0000

Thank you for "set varabbrev off". It is an excellent idea. Variable name abbreviation looks convenient, but I was never wild about it. It bit me several times on collaborative projects. It just never occurred to me to look into whether turning it off would be an option. Thanks again.

By: Jess

Jess — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:58:18 +0000

This is a great post. I don't have the background in computer programming that you do, but I have come to find structuring my .do files in the same way (pretty similar to yours) really helps keep me organized. I'm probably not as strict about it as I should be, but I almost always eventually go back and fill in the blanks anyway. One header command that I have recently started adding to my .do files is the -set varabbrev off- command. Of course, you may want this toggled on, but I've caught errors in my .do files by going back and adding this command. If you're working with a large dataset, or panel data where many variables have similar names, it's easy to think you have one variable in your dataset when you actually have another. If -set varabbrev- is toggled on (as is the default), a typo could easily be overlooked and the variable you're using may not be what you think.