Date:         Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:04:14 -0700
Reply-To:     lpogoda <lpogoda@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         lpogoda <lpogoda@HOTMAIL.COM>
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Subject:      Re: SAS is slow? (cpu time, etc)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Mauro Morandin <second_name@libero.it> wrote in message news:<3D9EF97C.7050007@libero.it>...
> Puddin',
>
> sometimes I'm right, sometimes I'm wrong. If my impression of SAS beeing
> an interpreter is wrong and you and others want to share your thoughts
> with me I am really grateful.

The manual states that SAS is a compiled language and the behavior is
consistent with a compiled language.  Where would you get the
"impression" that SAS is an interpreted language?


> As I said, I stand behind what I post to this newsgroup (there is my
> name, email, the company I work for) and so do many other beginner,
> experienced and SAS gurus like Dorfman, DeVenezia, Patridge, Ward,
> Cassell, Whitlock, Hermansen, Groeneveld, Whittington, ... sorry I can't
> name you all. I appreciate all the people who post to this newsgroup
> giving their real names and email addresses (it's a form of warranty),
> and I think that they should be free to bring up even unpopular
> arguments like ("SAS is slow") without beeing smashed by a horde of SAS
> evangelists.

First, that statement is not an argument, it's a value judgement.
Second, if you "should be free" to say what you want, so should
everyone else - that includes replies that "smash" other posts (I get
**so** tired of newsgroup postings that claim freedom of speech for
the author and simultaneously try to deny it to those who would
respond in disagreement).  And third, if you knew the statement would
be unpopular, the why post it unless the motive was to start a
controversy?