pspp-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Warnings exceed limit


From: Frans Houweling
Subject: Re: Warnings exceed limit
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 18:31:30 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1

Yes, but for errors we have MXERRS. I personally would like PSPP to halt on the first error, but never on a warning.
Greetings
frans

On 11/16/19 5:42 PM, Alan Mead wrote:
This is probably known, but SPSS will stop on some errors. If the GET DATA command fails, it will stop at the first routine that requires a dataset. I think it will also stop on a duplicate key when merging files by a condition.

I don't think it stops on errors like divide-by-zero (i.e., where I've generated the D-B-Z error in a COMPUTE statement).

I think it would generate warnings if my specification didn't match the data in a GET DATA statement, and only up to some limit. I agree with Frans, in a large dataset, this could generate a huge number of warnings. Missing values are a common problem. I had a problem recently where I needed to add a BOM to UTF8 data files or else SPSS will complain each time it reads a wide char (all because some of the survey responses used an mdash instead of a hyphen to represent a range, like 3-5!).

-Alan

On 11/16/2019 1:51 AM, Frans Houweling wrote:
Hi Ben,
GET DATA on csv files is the main source, like when missing values are coded "NA" or ":". Plus I do make the ehm occasional mistake - but as what I do wrong in the first record I do wrong in all the following records too, I always reach MXWARNS. I can see some justification for halting in the case of vector index out of bounds, but other errors like divide by zero cause no harm at all, like the GET DATA case.
So if I could decide, I would vote for continue syntax processing.
Thanks
frans


On 11/16/19 4:35 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
I'm a little surprised you're receiving so many warnings. Is that a problem of its own? What's the underlying cause?

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 12:36 PM Frans Houweling <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:

    Correction: syntax processing does stop - only not in the first
    procedure. Bad!
    frans

    On 11/15/19 8:47 PM, Frans Houweling wrote:

    > Hi,
    > I often see this message
    >   "note: Warnings (n+1) exceed limit (n).  Syntax processing
    will be
    > halted."
    > Luckily, syntax processing seems to go on anyway. I think the
    message
    > should just say "No more warnings will be issued" and syntax
    > processing should not be halted.
    > I am aware SET MXWARNS=0 suppresses all warnings - but I like to
    see
    > at least one (or possibly one per type).
    > Greetings
    > frans
    >


--

Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

http://www.alanmead.org

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building,
write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone,
comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate,
act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch
manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, and die gallantly. Specialization is for
insects."

-- Robert A. Heinlein



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]