Re: [Gretl-users] issue defining a panel with sub-sample data

On Tue, 1 Oct 2013, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote: >> This whole thing needs some more investigation. I guess for >> consistency we should either scrap the --balanced option or >> reactivate the balancing mode that's now disabled. Whenever I try to >> think this issue through it makes my head hurt, but I'll see what I can do... > > Personal opinion: if a panel structure is in force, --balanced should > be implicit in smpl. Rationale: a panel dataset is a panel dataset. > It simply can't stop being a panel dataset because you are > sub-sampling it. If you really want it to be interpreted differently, > then you have setobs for that. I hear you, but not all users have that expectation. At one time what the --balanced option does was the default, but I changed that (a long time ago now) after hearing from some users that they found the effect surprising, even disconcerting ("I thought I'd got rid of those rows, but there they still are, just with NAs substituted").