|
|||
|
Hi friends,
Run the following test program in both SAS vs. 8 and SAS vs. 9 if you can and have a look at the difference. DATA _NULL_; MisMis = . EQ -.; * -. is not the missing value ._; MisMis0 = 0 * (. EQ -.); * and neither the Morse code for N; MisMis1 = 1 * (. EQ -.); * it is: minus the missing value .; PUT (_ALL_)(=); RUN; SAS vs. 8 yields: MISMIS=1 MISMIS0=. MISMIS1=. while SAS vs. 9 yields: MISMIS=1 MISMIS0=0 MISMIS1=1 You could question the meaning of a negative missing value, but given the first value I think SAS vs. 9 is correct with the two other values and SAS vs. 8 is not. Where I work now (on secondment) they changed from SAS 8 to SAS 9 today. Regards - Jim. -- Jim Groeneveld, Netherlands Statistician, SAS consultant home.hccnet.nl/jim.groeneveld |
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Re: SAS 8 vs. 9 incompatibility | Jim Groeneveld | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-29-2006 09:08 AM |
| Re: SAS 8 vs. 9 incompatibility | Venky Chakravarthy | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-28-2006 04:59 PM |
| Re: SAS 8 vs. 9 incompatibility | Mike Rhoads | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-28-2006 03:11 PM |
| Re: SAS 8 vs. 9 incompatibility | Phil Rack | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-28-2006 02:48 PM |