Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:34:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCPHI)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: "Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCPHI)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Subject: Re: Macro %Include Stored-Compiled or Autocall
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
for follow-up reading:
A SASautos Companion
I have not done a major project using compiled and stored macros
only enough R&D to convince me that autocall is
cheaper and easier to maintain.
True, for its main criteria
* very large program
* very often-used programs
compile and store will be faster.
'Cheaper and easier to maintain' then has to be a small amount of
compared to the overall costs of the project.
$0.02 == <1%
Ron Fehd the macro maven CDC Atlanta GA USA RJF2 at cdc dot gov
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Paul St Louis
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 9:24 AM
> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Macro %Include Stored-Compiled or Autocall
> A very good programmer gifted me with a copy of Art
> Carpenter's "Complete
> Guide to the SAS Macro Language", which I'm slowly reading.
> I've heard all
> the arguments about how some portions of this book may be
> outdated or could
> be handled a better way, but I happen to think this person is
> very smart
> and his book to still be a valuable library addition (my 2 cents).
> Anyway, ignoring the use of display manager command-line macros, in an
> environment where your macros are not shared with others, are used
> consistently, and changed only occasionally....which method
> do you prefer
> Autocall facility?
> Compiled stored macros?
> I work in a windoze environment, ver 9.1. I know lots of
> folks have strong
> feelings about this, and my intent here is not to stir things up, but
> rather to gain the insight of others. I have no complex
> macros, and will
> not delve that deep into the macro world for some time to come.