Date:         Sun, 6 Oct 2002 16:49:08 GMT
Reply-To:     Mauro Morandin <second_name@LIBERO.IT>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Mauro Morandin <second_name@LIBERO.IT>
Organization: TIN
Subject:      Re: SAS is slow? (cpu time, etc)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

lpogoda wrote:
> 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?
>

Could you please explain why you consider the behaviour of SAS
consistent with a compiled language? Before I wrote to this newsgroup I
knew that SAS "compiles" into bytecode and then passes the bytecode to
the supervisor for execution. This is NOT the behaviour of a compiled
language.

I don't want to go over it again.

But anyway,

1. Why should I accept what is written in a manual as THE ONLY 100% TRUTH?
2. OK, SAS Institute claims in one of it's manuals that the SAS Language
is a compiled language. I have no means to verify that. I can't look at
the source code.
3. SAS differs from other compilers in it's use.
4. SAS doesn't produce an executable image.
5. SPEED of execution. I will show you with a small example that Python
(an interpreter) is faster at doing flat file I/O with some simple
logic. Next week I will post my Python program.



>
>
>>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?

You should have read the whole story with the threads before.

I don't mind beeing "smashed", but if I get a little bit angry, because
I feel my ideas/comments have been treated and commented with
superficiality (without thinking), and smash back with good arguments
but in a rough manner then someone might get hurt and I'm sorry for
that. I don't have problems with people who disagree with me. But
Puddin' probably thinks I've gone too far.


Third, I really didn't care whether it would be unpopular or not.




Ciao.
Mauro.




--
--
mauro morandin
SAS consultant
red hat certified engineer
mauro.morandin-NOSPAM-@ieee.org

--
matrix srl via postioma di salvarosa 25b      tel +39-423-724620
31033 castelfranco veneto (tv)                fax +39-423-770798
http://www.matrix-online.it
info-TAKEAWAY-@matrix-online.it