[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CTABLES
From: |
Ben Pfaff |
Subject: |
Re: CTABLES |
Date: |
Mon, 9 Nov 2015 07:06:03 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 10:28:30AM +0100, Matthias Faeth wrote:
> Thanks for the comprehensive explanation why CTABLES depend on the ability
> to read SPV files. Do I understand correctly that this dependency comes
> only from the pivot-function in the SPV file - meaning that you doubleclick
> on a table to change pages?
>
> I mean by that the following: The syntax of CTABLES is:
> "CTABLES downvariable BY acrossvariable BY pagevariable"
> Pages are shown in the SPV file only by doubleclicking and choosing another
> page.
>
> The function is a pain anyway because it is uncomfortable and also (at
> least for me) not working under all circumstances. So I can confirm Alans
> arguments on this although I have no idea why rendering a new page is not
> always working.
>
> To come back to the topic of implementing CTABLES:
> 1. Can we avoid the dependency on understanding SPV if we strip the CTABLES
> command of the page function? So to support only 2 dimensions in the
> output? This is probably what most users need.
Pivot tables are a lot more than just pages, and CTABLES is pretty tied
up with the pivot functionality.
> 2. Or do you think that is not worth to do, because once the SPV issue is
> solved the whole CTABLES output would have to be reprogrammed? Or are there
> other functions of the CTABLES command (like plots or graphs) that depend
> on the SPV issue, too?
This may be an issue, too, although I doubt that plots or graphs would
be in a first draft of the CTABLES functionality.
> 3. As I do not have any knowledge about TABLES: does TABLES have the same
> dependencies on pivot and SPV? Would it be a solution to come back to the
> proposal of ftr and Frans to opt for TABLES instead of CTABLES?
I haven't studied TABLES in the way I have CTABLES. I suspect that
users are more interested in the latter, because it's come up again and
again over the last few years, whereas the former has hardly been
mentioned.
- Re: CTABLES, (continued)
- Re: CTABLES, Alan Mead, 2015/11/07
- Re: CTABLES, Frans Houweling, 2015/11/07
- RE: CTABLES, Charles Johnson, 2015/11/07
- Re: CTABLES, Ben Pfaff, 2015/11/07
- RE: CTABLES, Charles Johnson, 2015/11/07
- Re: CTABLES, Ben Pfaff, 2015/11/08
- Re: CTABLES, Matthias Faeth, 2015/11/08
- RE: CTABLES, Crichton, Ronald, 2015/11/08
- Re: CTABLES, Ben Pfaff, 2015/11/08
- Re: CTABLES, Matthias Faeth, 2015/11/09
- Re: CTABLES,
Ben Pfaff <=
- Re: CTABLES, Matthias Faeth, 2015/11/09
- RE: CTABLES, Charles Johnson, 2015/11/09
- RE: CTABLES, Crichton, Ronald, 2015/11/09
- RE: CTABLES, Barry Kiefl, 2015/11/09
- Re: CTABLES, Ben Pfaff, 2015/11/16
- SPSS SPV quirk, Alan Mead, 2015/11/08
- Re: SPSS SPV quirk, Ben Pfaff, 2015/11/08
- Production Jobs, John Darrington, 2015/11/08
- RE: Production Jobs, Charles Johnson, 2015/11/08
- Re: Production Jobs, Roberto Gil Saura [UV], 2015/11/08