Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:30:59 -0500
Reply-To: Jonathan Goldberg <jonathan@MATLOCK.WUSTL.EDU>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Jonathan Goldberg <jonathan@MATLOCK.WUSTL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Obsolete SAS statements and options
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
John Whittington <John.W@MEDISCIENCE.CO.UK> asks:
>At 17:41 01/05/01 -0600, Jack Hamilton wrote:
>>The data set history feature saved the source code itself.
>I have recently seen several references to this apparent feature of old
>versions of PROC CONTENTS, but I am a little intrigued.
>Exactly what 'source code' was saved, I wonder? I would suspect that it
>will have been only the DATA or PROC step that actually created the
>- i.e. the last stage in the process. If that is the case then, at least
>with my programs, it could be very unhelpful in many cases, since that
>final step is often only the conclusion or bringing together of lots of
>code that went into creating the dataset in question.
I remember this. The history stored was whatever created the data
set. It was indeed "unhelpful in many cases" and I assume that is why it
was allowed to lapse. However, if the data set was created directly or
indirectly by a data step it could be quite useful; I remember it saving
me tears on more than one occasion.
The "indirectly" case came about because several generations of source
code were stored. So, if you had a data step, followed by a sort, you saw
both with the history option of proc contents. But if it was the result
of proc sort with the out= option all you saw was the sort (IIRC).
Missouri Alcoholism Research Center
Dept. of Psychiatry
Washington University School of Medicine
40 N. Kingshighway, Suite One
St. Louis, MO 63108