On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, Sven Schreiber wrote: > Hi, > > the irf() function is a weird thing in the sense that it is the only (?) > function that requires input beyond its specified arguments. Namely the > information from the previous VAR/VECM estimation. From a > programming-language systematic point of view it seems to be the "odd man > out". > > In contrast, the analogous FEVD calculations are not wrapped in a function, > but in the $fevd accessor, which makes more sense IMO. > > So I suggest to introduce a matching $irf accessor with the same layout as > the $fevd accessor. I am aware that the irf() function also needs an alpha > input; this could be done via "set irf_alpha 0.1" or something like that. > > Alternatively, the irf() function could get a new bundle argument which would > collect the VAR/VECM results. That way, no dependency on non-argument input > would be required, making the use consistent with all other functions.
Point taken. But right now I'm busy working on ARMA and I don't want to get distracted. Could you maybe file a bug report or feature request so this doesn't get forgotten? Allin
