[wbuchanan]

A simple UI improvement: I would love to see tabbed filename completion after do, use, using, and ls(and maybe other relevant commands/contexts).

I know that in other contexts, tab completion is for variable names. But you'll never have a varlist after ls or do, and rarely after use (unless you're re-loading a subset of variables for the dataset already in memory).

Tab completion of commands would also be pretty cool.

This may be harder to work with existing syntax, but my dream would be unixlike command line shortcuts e.g. !$ to repeat the last argument from the previous command

Allan Massie if you use a quotation mark you should be able to use tab completion for file names after it. I think it works that way primarily because files can be created with embedded spaces in the names.

[Clyde Schechter]

Re #135. Given the number of posts on Statalist with people asking for help in pulling together a large family of spreadsheets into a single Stata file, I do not doubt that this feature would be popular.

I also do not doubt that it would be problematic. If you look at the posts where people ask for, and receive, help pulling a family of spreadsheets into Stata (which, yes, does involve -save-ing them as Stata files, or at least as tempfiles, along the way) you will also note that many of these threads continue on with requests for further help that results from inconsistencies and incompatibilities among the various spreadsheets. Those inconsistencies are better worked out in Stata than in the original spreadsheet files for two reasons: 1) Stata has better tools for fixing them, and 2) Stata leaves an audit trail of the changes made (assuming you are using a -log-, which, you should always do.) So there is a real advantage to having the Stata files saved along the way.

[Niels Henrik Bruun]

At #124 #125 #126. Have you tried -serset clear- just before twoway? Then you can have plenty of lines

[Chris Martin]

It would be very helpful to have a single command that outputs a correlation table in the standard publication format, i.e., two decimal places, stars for significance level. Doing this currently is quite complex, and I'm sometimes surprised that it's easier to run a three-level multilevel model with random effects (one line of code) than to get a publishable correlation table.

[Bruce Weaver]

Please consider tweaking -nestreg- to make it work with factor variables. This would be a great improvement IMO. Thanks.

I just notice that the update on 16-Oct-2019 included this item:

     4.  nestreg now supports factor-variables notation.  The old behavior (that is, not
         allowing factor-variables notation) is preserved under version control.

Thanks. This is great news.

[Leonardo Guizzetti]

It would be very helpful to have a single command that outputs a correlation table in the standard publication format, i.e., two decimal places, stars for significance level. Doing this currently is quite complex, and I'm sometimes surprised that it's easier to run a three-level multilevel model with random effects (one line of code) than to get a publishable correlation table.

What does a "publication quality" correlation table look like exactly? Is it point estimates only? Is it symmetric, upper triangular, lower triangular? Does it use listwise or casewise deletion? Are sample sizes published on a like below, beside, in brackets? There are many questions of substance and style that are open to interpretation, depending on ones own area of research. For this reason, it's hard to imagine a default that pleases everyone.

What would be a big help would be for Stata's pwcorr and spearman commands to both output the same set of matrix results to help someone should they want to begin this project.

[Yao Zhao]

frame copy default newframe1 newframe2

Currently, I can only create one new frame at one time

[John Mullahy]

Jumping onto #139 and #141, I would request that the scope, flexibility, and applicability for -cformat- be expanded.

[Laura Grant]

I would like to see a -dowinmonth()- function within the datetime options. This would find the Nth day of a week in a month.

Thus, for a long panel or time series, one could generate dummies for holidays, such as Thanksgiving or MLK day, that always fall on the Nth DOW of a month.

Stata bcal allows to omit these through loading an .stbcal and using the command -omit dowinmonth 4th Th of Nov- (see -help datetime_business_calendars-), as a cumbersome workaround.

Code (via Nick Cox), with variables mdate ddate for monthly and daily dates, can give an individual holiday

gen month = month(date) 
  bysort mdate (ddate): gen wanted = sum(dow(ddate) == 4) == 4 & month == 11

I also figured it out using the _n function for each year-month-dow...

It would be nice to see a simpler solution.

[Dirk Enzmann]

Improve the help description of -describe-. To avoid misunderstandings, instead of

describe stores the following in r():

Scalars
r(N) number of observations
r(k) number of variables
r(width) width of dataset
r(changed) flag indicating data have changed since last save

it should be

describe stores the following in r():

Scalars
r(N) number of observations of dataset
r(k) number of variables of dataset
r(width) width of dataset
r(changed) flag indicating data have changed since last save

[Mario Ferri]

3D graphs

[Marcos Almeida]

Hamiltonian Monte Carlo directly with - bayes - prefix. Not with a Stan plug-in.

[Mario Ferri]

Time varying regression
Drifting coefficient regression
Time varying stochastic volatility for panel data,

In short stata should become competitive to Matlab and R packages.

[Jan Zouhar]

I would love to see new Do-file editor features (admittedly, I am missing the features I use in RStudio when forced to operate in R):

1) Navigation pane (with headings marked e.g. by comments in a specific format, i.e. "* Heading 1 *****").

2) Shortcuts to (i) do/run the current chunk of code (either program definition or a section delineated by section headings, see above) and (ii) do/run from the top (currently we have Do to bottom, why not have the opposite -- which btw I find myself using much more often in R).

3) I second the request to allow docking the do-file within the main Stata window.

Finally, let me thank StataCorp for the wonderful additions in Stata 15 and 16. I have been a user since Stata 11 and the last two version updates have really cleared most of my earlier (unspoken) wishes.

[Leonardo Guizzetti]

I would love to see new Do-file editor features (admittedly, I am missing the features I use in RStudio when forced to operate in R):

2) Shortcuts to (i) do/run the current chunk of code (either program definition or a section delineated by section headings, see above) and (ii) do/run from the top (currently we have Do to bottom, why not have the opposite -- which btw I find myself using much more often in R).

This one confuses me.The do-file editor already allows "Execute (do)" (Ctrl + D, on Windows) which allows the entire script to be run from the top. Or if you highlight some lines, the same thing will also execute just those lines of code. What is it that you are missing?