[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sas-l
Subject:    Re: PROC TRANSPOSE vs Array
From:       Arthur Li <arthurli () COH ! ORG>
Date:       2012-11-29 16:17:03
Message-ID: 201211291617.qAT6193s030977 () waikiki ! cc ! uga ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:09:30 +0000, Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/OCOO/OCIO/ITSO) <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
wrote:

>> From: Jim Groeneveld
>> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 9:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: PROC TRANSPOSE vs Array
>>
>> But why would you want to rotate your data using a dedicated data step?
>
>good question, Jim
>
>for which I am a data point:
>
>in data step you can do
>* lookups
>* add variables
>
>in my data we had a sample-code, which had a look-up to sample-id
>Sample_ID = put(SmplCode(I),$SmplId.);
>
>the sample-id had an expected result
>Sample_Result = put(Sample_Id,$SmplRslt.);
>
>then we compared the test result with the Sample_Result:
>Agreement = Sample_Result eq SmplResult(I);
>
>summary:
>* for simple rotation, use proc transpose
>* for fluffing up the data, you'll need a data step somewhere
>
>Ron Fehd  rotation maven
>

I agree with Ron's summary.

BTW, I want to make sure that I have everyone's names correctly from this discussion because I will
write in the acknowledgment. So far, I have the following:
Jim Groeneveld, Data _null_; (John King), Joseph Hinson, and Ron Fehd


Thanks again everyone!

Arthur
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]