Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 14:09:41 -0800
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Subject: Re: implied RETURN
In-Reply-To: <F165wdUTaGmvSVMum030000a0f2@hotmail.com>; from
firstname.lastname@example.org on Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 09:05:09PM +0000
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
on Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 09:05:09PM +0000, Paul Dorfman (email@example.com) wrote:
> >_N_ equals zero *prior* to the first iteration of the data step loop.
> I *guess* that prior to... _n_ is rather missing, or, most probably, just
> compgarbage. Which does not really matter, for the next internal counter
> value gets *moved* into _n_ by the first internal instruction in each
Getting fuzzy-headed in my old age. Yeah, what I said didn't make
Jack Hamilton's probably to blame for me picking up the '_n_ eq 0'
idiom, as I worked under him for a while.
Certain SAS statements, principally SET and OUPUT, have both executable
and non-executable components. The non-executable component is the
initialization of the program data vector, and of output datasets. This
initialization occurs so long as the statement is in non-commented code,
whether or not the statement is actually reachable in data step
As noted, the construct 'if _n_ eq 0 then' syntax is equivalent to 'if
FALSE_CONDITION do' -- the conditional code is never executed. However,
a SET, MERGE, UPDATE, OUTPUT, or similar statement will be initialized.
Jack, back to you.
Karsten M. Self <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
Evangelist, Zelerate, Inc. http://www.zelerate.org
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal