Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R
in [SAS]
|
From: Nathaniel Wooding on 7 Mar 2010 18:10 SAS acquired Proc Spell when they bought Lattice Corp back when they wanted control of a C compiler when they were getting to do the major rewrite to produce V6. There were no SAS terms in the Lattice word list and they did not add any. By the way, Spell can be a useful tool even if it is no longer documented. Barbara Okerson has recently done an SGF paper which mentions it. I have to wonder whether SAS-SAP is the SAS interface to SAP. Nat -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Arthur Tabachneck Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 2:18 PM To: SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R Jack, I can't speak for Roger, of course, but I can provide one explanation. If one runs proc spell on a document that contains "sas", sas isn't found but sap is offered as an alternative. Try, e.g.,: filename temp temp; data _null_; file temp; informat sentence $100.; input sentence &; put sentence; cards; sas ; proc spell in=temp suggest; run; Art ---------- On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 10:31:56 -0800, Jack Hamilton <jfh(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG> wrote: >I'm not sure why you keep bringing up SAP. If I wanted an example of a company that takes good products and ruins them, I would choose Computer Associates or Symantec (primarily because they have general-purpose products that I'm familiar with, where SAP has a special purpose product I'm not familiar with). What is the point of the comparison with SAP? > > > >-- >Jack Hamilton >jfh(a)alumni.stanford.org >Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. > > >On Mar 6, 2010, at 1:36 pm, xlr82sas wrote: > >> On Mar 6, 10:12 am, j...(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG (Jack Hamilton) wrote: >>> The problem with .NET is that it restricts programs to being run on Windows. >>> >>> In theory, some programs could run on other platforms using Mono, but I'll believe that when SAS Institute gives us the Mac version of Enterprise Guide. >>> >>> -- >>> Jack Hamilton >>> j...(a)alumni.stanford.org >>> Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:19 pm, Alan Churchill wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Never going to happen on the .NET front and SAS was right to choose it (they >>>> should do more .NET, not less). >>> >>>> Also, name a product where Microsoft charges outrageous fees for underlying >>>> code? .NET is required to run Windows so it is core technology and most of >>>> the code base has been released to the public. >>> >>>> Java, BTW, is solely owned by Sun. What other technology is proposed for >>>> creating UIs? >>> >>>> Alan >>> >>>> Alan Churchill >>>> Savian >>>> www.savian.net >>>> Office: (719) 687-5954 >>>> Cell: (719) 310-4870 >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of >>>> xlr82sas >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:22 PM >>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>> >>>> On Mar 4, 11:01 am, stringplaye...(a)YAHOO.COM (Dale McLerran) wrote: >>>>> --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> wrote: >>> >>>>>> From: Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> >>>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>>>> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 8:55 AM Three little points: >>> >>>>>> 1) >>>>>> Dale: >>>>>> You're not really taking exception; I wrote: >>>>>>>> that's why the R interface in in IML; OTHER PARTS OF SAS don't >>>>>>>> have any data type that loosely corresponds to an R frame. >>>>>> In other words, I agree that an R frame and a SAS data set are very >>>>>> similar; it's just that only IML has any facilities for manipulating >>>>>> SAS data sets as entities. (Unless perhaps you count the table >>>>>> processing language). >>> >>>>> Jonathan, >>> >>>>> Can you elaborate on the facilities in IML for manipulating data sets >>>>> as entities. I'm afraid that I don't understand your argument. >>> >>>>> Also, why must a SAS data set be mapped into an R data frame as an >>>>> entity? >>> >>>>> Dale >>> >>>>> --------------------------------------- >>>>> Dale McLerran >>>>> Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center >>>>> mailto: dmclerra(a)NO_SPAMfhcrc.org >>>>> Ph: (206) 667-2926 >>>>> Fax: (206) 667-5977 >>>>> ---------------------------------------- Hide quoted text - >>> >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>>> Hi Sas-Lers, >>> >>>> Proc matrix was part of base SAS and had a couple of nice properties on >>>> big IBM mainframes. >>> >>>> 1. It had limited but useful 128bit numeric capabilites(way ahead >>>> of its time) >>>> 2. It used IBM's separate 'hardware vector engine' for fast >>>> parallel vector operations (way ahead of its time) >>> >>>> SOAPBOX ON: >>> >>>> I made heavy use of 'proc matrix' and when SAS decided to rip it out of >>>> base and charge very high fees for large two sided 8 way mainframes, my >>>> management was not pleased. >>> >>>> SAS did provide a translator from Matrix to IML. >>> >>>> Here is what scares me at SAS: >>> >>>> 1. It looks like Enterprise Guide is the window to future SAS and >>>> SAS_SAP. Also it looks like EG is somehow in bed with Microsoft's >>>> proprietary .NET. Suppose Microsoft comes out with a Starship Enterprise >>>> Version of .NET and decides to charge $500,000 dollars for Startship >>>> Enterprise .NET. SAS is also prety good at playing this game. >>> >>>> 2. I worry about EG as a poison pill for programmers and companies. >>>> Suppose programmers get sucked into the givaway EG. SAS throws in IOM, >>>> metadata servers, stored processes, data architechure tools .. low cost at >>>> first. Then comes the 'proc matrix' hammer and programmers and companies >>>> have to pony up with massive spending increases or massive reprogramming to >>>> move away from SAS-SAP. For instance if the once free components of EG, like >>>> proc matrix, are now enterprise versions at extra cost. >>> >>>> I think EG should reflect the future costs now. It should be priced at >>>> least 2x Windows Base SAS + SAS-Connect. Companies need to take a close look >>>> at future IT costs and SAS's revenue strategy with respect to EG. Just look >>>> at the costs asssociated with SAP. I also don't like it when SAS gives away >>>> 'ODS GRAHICS' and then charges for it later. I know this in not strickly >>>> bait and switch, but it smells. >>> >>>> I also find it very hypocritical for SAS to complain openly about an >>>> inefficient interface to Oracle, when SAS does not even have a silient ODBC >>>> product. >>> >>>> SOAPBOX OFF:- Hide quoted text - >>> >>> - Show quoted text - >> >> I am not a lawyer but the details of licenses and contracts is in the >> fine print. >> >> SUN Java -- GNU GPLv2 License >> I believe Java is licensed under popular GNU GPLv2 terms. >> Everything associated Java language, Java class libraries .... is open >> Code isolation is required, my drop downs are ok because I do not >> interact with R, perl or Java with >> changes at JAVA source code level. >> I don't think you can make changes to Java code and stick it in your >> software and charge >> $500,000 dollars. >> >> Microsoft .NET is under the Apache license. >> Apache license: it allows use of the source code for the development >> of proprietary software as well as free and open source software. >> Apache is preferred by coporations because it imposes few restriction >> on source code usage. This is why SAS uses .NET instead of Java. >> >> It has nothing to do with software quality. >> I don't think everthing is open in .NET, ie certain key stacks - >> beyond the scope of my knowledge. >> As far as windows 'open source' minimally it would be nice if >> Microsoft made available the source >> code for all the crtical APIs, like windows explorer. >> I think there are even more issues with C# and its relation to .NET. >> (Microsoft charging for C##) >> I don't see why a company cant develop an Enterprise .NET(usng .NET >> code) along with C## and charge for it. >> >> SOAPBOX ON: >> >> I couple of lines in a license or contract/license can make all the >> difference. >> >> Microsoft is where it is because of a few lines in a contract/ >> license with IBM that allowed MS to develop the MS-DOS >> operating system. There used to be an IBM-DOS and a MS-DOS. What >> microsoft did was put some horrible GUI on 16bit DOS >> and sucker the public into using it. With the GUI as an anchor >> microsoft developed inferior MS-WORD(Wordperfect was much beter) >> and excel(lotus was better). SAS is now using the EG GUI to sucker >> executives and bean counters to eliminating Windows and SAS-connect. >> It's al about the almighty dollar. SAS seeks the SAP fortune, however >> along with SAS-SAP comes a much lower quality SAS. >> >> SOAPBOX OFF: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> SOAPBOX ON; >> >> Microsoft did change the .NET from a weaker 'Community License' to the >> Appache license a couple of years ago. >> Users often tend to be supecious of Microsoft because it does things >> like issue fixes to operating systems like Vista and >> then has the nerve to charge for Windows 7. >> >> Also Microsoft has the best lawyers in the business. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
From: Arthur Tabachneck on 7 Mar 2010 18:41 Nat, I just did a Toronto Area SAS Society (our SUG) coder's corner breakout session on an old Paul Dorfman post about proc spell. The presentation can be found at: http://www.torsas.ca/downloads/20100305/Art_TASS_5Mar2010a.ppt Art -------- On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 18:10:27 -0500, Nathaniel Wooding <nathaniel.wooding(a)DOM.COM> wrote: >SAS acquired Proc Spell when they bought Lattice Corp back when they wanted control of a C compiler when they were getting to do the major rewrite to produce V6. There were no SAS terms in the Lattice word list and they did not add any. > >By the way, Spell can be a useful tool even if it is no longer documented. Barbara Okerson has recently done an SGF paper which mentions it. > >I have to wonder whether SAS-SAP is the SAS interface to SAP. > >Nat > >-----Original Message----- >From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Arthur Tabachneck >Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 2:18 PM >To: SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R > >Jack, > >I can't speak for Roger, of course, but I can provide one explanation. > >If one runs proc spell on a document that contains "sas", sas isn't found >but sap is offered as an alternative. Try, e.g.,: > >filename temp temp; > >data _null_; > file temp; > informat sentence $100.; > input sentence &; > put sentence; > cards; >sas >; > >proc spell > in=temp > suggest; >run; > >Art >---------- >On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 10:31:56 -0800, Jack Hamilton <jfh(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG> >wrote: > >>I'm not sure why you keep bringing up SAP. If I wanted an example of a >company that takes good products and ruins them, I would choose Computer >Associates or Symantec (primarily because they have general-purpose >products that I'm familiar with, where SAP has a special purpose product >I'm not familiar with). What is the point of the comparison with SAP? >> >> >> >>-- >>Jack Hamilton >>jfh(a)alumni.stanford.org >>Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. >> >> >>On Mar 6, 2010, at 1:36 pm, xlr82sas wrote: >> >>> On Mar 6, 10:12 am, j...(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG (Jack Hamilton) wrote: >>>> The problem with .NET is that it restricts programs to being run on >Windows. >>>> >>>> In theory, some programs could run on other platforms using Mono, but >I'll believe that when SAS Institute gives us the Mac version of >Enterprise Guide. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jack Hamilton >>>> j...(a)alumni.stanford.org >>>> Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. >>>> >>>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:19 pm, Alan Churchill wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Never going to happen on the .NET front and SAS was right to choose >it (they >>>>> should do more .NET, not less). >>>> >>>>> Also, name a product where Microsoft charges outrageous fees for >underlying >>>>> code? .NET is required to run Windows so it is core technology and >most of >>>>> the code base has been released to the public. >>>> >>>>> Java, BTW, is solely owned by Sun. What other technology is proposed >for >>>>> creating UIs? >>>> >>>>> Alan >>>> >>>>> Alan Churchill >>>>> Savian >>>>> www.savian.net >>>>> Office: (719) 687-5954 >>>>> Cell: (719) 310-4870 >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of >>>>> xlr82sas >>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:22 PM >>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>>> >>>>> On Mar 4, 11:01 am, stringplaye...(a)YAHOO.COM (Dale McLerran) wrote: >>>>>> --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> >wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> From: Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>>>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>>>>> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 8:55 AM Three little points: >>>> >>>>>>> 1) >>>>>>> Dale: >>>>>>> You're not really taking exception; I wrote: >>>>>>>>> that's why the R interface in in IML; OTHER PARTS OF SAS don't >>>>>>>>> have any data type that loosely corresponds to an R frame. >>>>>>> In other words, I agree that an R frame and a SAS data set are very >>>>>>> similar; it's just that only IML has any facilities for manipulating >>>>>>> SAS data sets as entities. (Unless perhaps you count the table >>>>>>> processing language). >>>> >>>>>> Jonathan, >>>> >>>>>> Can you elaborate on the facilities in IML for manipulating data sets >>>>>> as entities. I'm afraid that I don't understand your argument. >>>> >>>>>> Also, why must a SAS data set be mapped into an R data frame as an >>>>>> entity? >>>> >>>>>> Dale >>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------- >>>>>> Dale McLerran >>>>>> Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center >>>>>> mailto: dmclerra(a)NO_SPAMfhcrc.org >>>>>> Ph: (206) 667-2926 >>>>>> Fax: (206) 667-5977 >>>>>> ---------------------------------------- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>>>> Hi Sas-Lers, >>>> >>>>> Proc matrix was part of base SAS and had a couple of nice properties >on >>>>> big IBM mainframes. >>>> >>>>> 1. It had limited but useful 128bit numeric capabilites(way >ahead >>>>> of its time) >>>>> 2. It used IBM's separate 'hardware vector engine' for fast >>>>> parallel vector operations (way ahead of its time) >>>> >>>>> SOAPBOX ON: >>>> >>>>> I made heavy use of 'proc matrix' and when SAS decided to rip it out >of >>>>> base and charge very high fees for large two sided 8 way mainframes, >my >>>>> management was not pleased. >>>> >>>>> SAS did provide a translator from Matrix to IML. >>>> >>>>> Here is what scares me at SAS: >>>> >>>>> 1. It looks like Enterprise Guide is the window to future SAS and >>>>> SAS_SAP. Also it looks like EG is somehow in bed with Microsoft's >>>>> proprietary .NET. Suppose Microsoft comes out with a Starship >Enterprise >>>>> Version of .NET and decides to charge $500,000 dollars for Startship >>>>> Enterprise .NET. SAS is also prety good at playing this game. >>>> >>>>> 2. I worry about EG as a poison pill for programmers and >companies. >>>>> Suppose programmers get sucked into the givaway EG. SAS throws in IOM, >>>>> metadata servers, stored processes, data architechure tools .. low >cost at >>>>> first. Then comes the 'proc matrix' hammer and programmers and >companies >>>>> have to pony up with massive spending increases or massive >reprogramming to >>>>> move away from SAS-SAP. For instance if the once free components of >EG, like >>>>> proc matrix, are now enterprise versions at extra cost. >>>> >>>>> I think EG should reflect the future costs now. It should be priced >at >>>>> least 2x Windows Base SAS + SAS-Connect. Companies need to take a >close look >>>>> at future IT costs and SAS's revenue strategy with respect to EG. >Just look >>>>> at the costs asssociated with SAP. I also don't like it when SAS >gives away >>>>> 'ODS GRAHICS' and then charges for it later. I know this in not >strickly >>>>> bait and switch, but it smells. >>>> >>>>> I also find it very hypocritical for SAS to complain openly about an >>>>> inefficient interface to Oracle, when SAS does not even have a >silient ODBC >>>>> product. >>>> >>>>> SOAPBOX OFF:- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>> I am not a lawyer but the details of licenses and contracts is in the >>> fine print. >>> >>> SUN Java -- GNU GPLv2 License >>> I believe Java is licensed under popular GNU GPLv2 terms. >>> Everything associated Java language, Java class libraries .... is open >>> Code isolation is required, my drop downs are ok because I do not >>> interact with R, perl or Java with >>> changes at JAVA source code level. >>> I don't think you can make changes to Java code and stick it in your >>> software and charge >>> $500,000 dollars. >>> >>> Microsoft .NET is under the Apache license. >>> Apache license: it allows use of the source code for the development >>> of proprietary software as well as free and open source software. >>> Apache is preferred by coporations because it imposes few restriction >>> on source code usage. This is why SAS uses .NET instead of Java. >>> >>> It has nothing to do with software quality. >>> I don't think everthing is open in .NET, ie certain key stacks - >>> beyond the scope of my knowledge. >>> As far as windows 'open source' minimally it would be nice if >>> Microsoft made available the source >>> code for all the crtical APIs, like windows explorer. >>> I think there are even more issues with C# and its relation to .NET. >>> (Microsoft charging for C##) >>> I don't see why a company cant develop an Enterprise .NET(usng .NET >>> code) along with C## and charge for it. >>> >>> SOAPBOX ON: >>> >>> I couple of lines in a license or contract/license can make all the >>> difference. >>> >>> Microsoft is where it is because of a few lines in a contract/ >>> license with IBM that allowed MS to develop the MS-DOS >>> operating system. There used to be an IBM-DOS and a MS-DOS. What >>> microsoft did was put some horrible GUI on 16bit DOS >>> and sucker the public into using it. With the GUI as an anchor >>> microsoft developed inferior MS-WORD(Wordperfect was much beter) >>> and excel(lotus was better). SAS is now using the EG GUI to sucker >>> executives and bean counters to eliminating Windows and SAS-connect. >>> It's al about the almighty dollar. SAS seeks the SAP fortune, however >>> along with SAS-SAP comes a much lower quality SAS. >>> >>> SOAPBOX OFF: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> SOAPBOX ON; >>> >>> Microsoft did change the .NET from a weaker 'Community License' to the >>> Appache license a couple of years ago. >>> Users often tend to be supecious of Microsoft because it does things >>> like issue fixes to operating systems like Vista and >>> then has the nerve to charge for Windows 7. >>> >>> Also Microsoft has the best lawyers in the business. >CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains >information which may be legally confidential and or privileged and >does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer >relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional >express written confirmation to that effect. The information is >intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access >by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended >recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the >contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If >you have received this electronic transmission in error, please >reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message >in error, and delete it. Thank you.
From: xlr82sas on 7 Mar 2010 23:36 On Mar 3, 2:49 pm, RHOAD...(a)WESTAT.COM (Mike Rhoads) wrote: > Actually, I believe it was PROC FSCALC. I can't remember whether it was part of BaseSASorSAS/FSP (as the name would suggest). > > There are still a couple of references to it buried onsas.com. ;-) > > Mike Rhoads > Rhoad...(a)Westat.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From:SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Burton > Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:42 PM > To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > Subject: Re: WhySASprogrammersneed to be aware of perl and R > > Yep, that's what I thought it was, > > but didn't want to say so, be incorrect and appear the fool. > > I tried to use it to develop a project for a client (the company comptroller's secretary), but she didn't like it. > So, I had to simulate another spreadsheet using Data Step Programming andSAS/FSE. > > Best Cheers, > Ray Burton > Richmond VA > AnalyticBridge, inCircle, Linked-In, MedZilla,SAS/L, IT-Toolboxhttp://www..analyticbridge.com/profile/rayburton/http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnrayburton/http://it.toolbox.com/people/ray_burton/?pv=1/ > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:36 PM, F. J. Kelley <jkel...(a)uga.edu> wrote: > > proc CALC? > > > I don't believe I ever used it. > > > ---- Original message ---- > >>Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:32:16 -0500 > >>From: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> (on behalf of John > >>Burton <jrburtonsas...(a)GMAIL.COM>) > >>Subject: Re: [SAS-L] WhySASprogrammersneed to be aware of perl and > >>R > >>To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > > >>On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 1:50 PM, F. J. Kelley <jkel...(a)uga.edu> wrote: > >>> I wondered if any other old timer would remember this. Proc Matrix was removed as of V6, but had been a staple ofSASin the years before. With Matrix you could write stat procs which did not exist inSAS/Stat (at the time). > > >>I wonder if the old-timers and the spreadsheet proc that was in Base > >>SASback in the 80s? I don't remember the name of the proc, but that > >>it soon disappeared as some PC shreadsheet was the dominent software > >>at the time and that has now been replaced by MS/Excell. > > >>-- > >>Best Cheers, > >>Ray Burton- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text Hi SAS-Lers, Does anyone remember FSLETTER
From: Paul Dorfman on 8 Mar 2010 09:51 Art, Thanks for the fine CPR job. Apparently, SAS-L posts retain their resurrect= ion capacity regardless of their age and/or the SAS functionality they disc= uss. Kind regards----------------Paul DorfmanJax, FL----------------=A0 --- On Sun, 3/7/10, Arthur Tabachneck <art297(a)NETSCAPE.NET> wrote: From: Arthur Tabachneck <art297(a)NETSCAPE.NET> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R To: SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 6:41 PM Nat, I just did a Toronto Area SAS Society (our SUG) coder's corner breakout session on an old Paul Dorfman post about proc spell.=A0 The presentation can be found at: http://www.torsas.ca/downloads/20100305/Art_TASS_5Mar2010a.ppt Art -------- On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 18:10:27 -0500, Nathaniel Wooding <nathaniel.wooding(a)DOM.COM> wrote: >SAS acquired Proc Spell when they bought Lattice Corp back when they wanted control of a C compiler when they were getting to do the major rewrite to produce V6. There were no SAS terms in the Lattice word list and they did not add any. > >By the way, Spell can be a useful tool even if it is no longer documented. Barbara Okerson has recently done an SGF paper which mentions it. > >I have to wonder whether SAS-SAP is the SAS interface to SAP. > >Nat > >-----Original Message----- >From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Arthur Tabachneck >Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 2:18 PM >To: SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R > >Jack, > >I can't speak for Roger, of course, but I can provide one explanation. > >If one runs proc spell on a document that contains "sas", sas isn't found >but sap is offered as an alternative.=A0 Try, e.g.,: > >filename temp temp; > >data _null_; >=A0 file temp; >=A0 informat sentence $100.; >=A0 input sentence &; >=A0 put sentence; >=A0 cards; >sas >; > >proc spell >=A0=A0=A0in=3Dtemp >=A0=A0=A0suggest; >run; > >Art >---------- >On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 10:31:56 -0800, Jack Hamilton <jfh(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG> >wrote: > >>I'm not sure why you keep bringing up SAP.=A0 If I wanted an example of a >company that takes good products and ruins them, I would choose Computer >Associates or Symantec (primarily because they have general-purpose >products that I'm familiar with, where SAP has a special purpose product >I'm not familiar with).=A0 What is the point of the comparison with SAP? >> >> >> >>-- >>Jack Hamilton >>jfh(a)alumni.stanford.org >>Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. >> >> >>On Mar 6, 2010, at 1:36 pm, xlr82sas wrote: >> >>> On Mar 6, 10:12 am, j...(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG (Jack Hamilton) wrote: >>>> The problem with .NET is that it restricts programs to being run on >Windows. >>>> >>>> In theory, some programs could run on other platforms using Mono, but >I'll believe that when SAS Institute gives us the Mac version of >Enterprise Guide. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jack Hamilton >>>> j...(a)alumni.stanford.org >>>> Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. >>>> >>>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:19 pm, Alan Churchill wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Never going to happen on the .NET front and SAS was right to choose >it (they >>>>> should do more .NET, not less). >>>> >>>>> Also, name a product where Microsoft charges outrageous fees for >underlying >>>>> code? .NET is required to run Windows so it is core technology and >most of >>>>> the code base has been released to the public. >>>> >>>>> Java, BTW, is solely owned by Sun. What other technology is proposed >for >>>>> creating UIs? >>>> >>>>> Alan >>>> >>>>> Alan Churchill >>>>> Savian >>>>> www.savian.net >>>>> Office:=A0=A0=A0(719) 687-5954 >>>>> Cell:=A0 =A0 =A0 (719) 310-4870 >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of >>>>> xlr82sas >>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:22 PM >>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>>> >>>>> On Mar 4, 11:01 am, stringplaye...(a)YAHOO.COM (Dale McLerran) wrote: >>>>>> --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> >wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> From: Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R >>>>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>>>>>> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 8:55 AM Three little points: >>>> >>>>>>> 1) >>>>>>> Dale: >>>>>>> You're not really taking exception; I wrote: >>>>>>>>> that's why the R interface in in IML; OTHER PARTS OF SAS don't >>>>>>>>> have any data type that loosely corresponds to an R frame. >>>>>>> In other words, I agree that an R frame and a SAS data set are very >>>>>>> similar; it's just that only IML has any facilities for manipulating >>>>>>> SAS data sets as entities. (Unless perhaps you count the table >>>>>>> processing language). >>>> >>>>>> Jonathan, >>>> >>>>>> Can you elaborate on the facilities in IML for manipulating data sets >>>>>> as entities.=A0 I'm afraid that I don't understand your argument. >>>> >>>>>> Also, why must a SAS data set be mapped into an R data frame as an >>>>>> entity? >>>> >>>>>> Dale >>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------- >>>>>> Dale McLerran >>>>>> Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center >>>>>> mailto: dmclerra(a)NO_SPAMfhcrc.org >>>>>> Ph:=A0 (206) 667-2926 >>>>>> Fax: (206) 667-5977 >>>>>> ---------------------------------------- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>>>> Hi Sas-Lers, >>>> >>>>> Proc matrix was part of base SAS and had a couple of nice properties >on >>>>> big IBM mainframes. >>>> >>>>>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0=A01. It had limited but useful 128bit numeric capab= ilites(way >ahead >>>>> of its time) >>>>>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0=A02. It used IBM's separate 'hardware vector engine= ' for fast >>>>> parallel vector operations (way ahead of its time) >>>> >>>>> SOAPBOX ON: >>>> >>>>> I made heavy use of 'proc matrix' and when SAS decided to rip it out >of >>>>> base and charge very high fees for large two sided 8 way mainframes, >my >>>>> management was not pleased. >>>> >>>>> SAS did provide a translator from Matrix to IML. >>>> >>>>> Here is what scares me at SAS: >>>> >>>>>=A0 =A0=A0=A01. It looks like Enterprise Guide is the window to future= SAS and >>>>> SAS_SAP. Also it looks like EG is somehow in bed with Microsoft's >>>>> proprietary .NET. Suppose Microsoft comes out with a Starship >Enterprise >>>>> Version of .NET and decides to charge $500,000 dollars for Startship >>>>> Enterprise .NET. SAS is also prety good at playing this game. >>>> >>>>>=A0 =A0=A0=A02. I worry about EG as a poison pill for programmers and >companies. >>>>> Suppose programmers get sucked into the givaway EG. SAS throws in IOM, >>>>> metadata servers, stored processes, data architechure tools .. low >cost at >>>>> first. Then comes the 'proc matrix' hammer and programmers and >companies >>>>> have to pony up with massive spending increases or massive >reprogramming to >>>>> move away from SAS-SAP. For instance if the once free components of >EG, like >>>>> proc matrix, are now enterprise versions at extra cost. >>>> >>>>>=A0=A0=A0I think EG should reflect the future costs now. It should be = priced >at >>>>> least 2x Windows Base SAS + SAS-Connect. Companies need to take a >close look >>>>> at future IT costs and SAS's revenue strategy with respect to EG. >Just look >>>>> at the costs asssociated with SAP. I also don't like it when SAS >gives away >>>>> 'ODS GRAHICS' and then charges for it later. I know this in not >strickly >>>>> bait and switch, but it smells. >>>> >>>>>=A0=A0=A0I also find it very hypocritical for SAS to complain openly a= bout an >>>>> inefficient interface to Oracle, when SAS does not even have a >silient ODBC >>>>> product. >>>> >>>>> SOAPBOX OFF:- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>> I am not a lawyer but the details of licenses and contracts is in the >>> fine print. >>> >>> SUN Java -- GNU GPLv2 License >>> I believe Java is licensed under popular GNU GPLv2 terms. >>> Everything associated Java language, Java class libraries .... is open >>> Code isolation is required, my drop downs are ok because I do not >>> interact with R, perl or Java with >>> changes at JAVA source code level. >>> I don't think you can make changes to Java code and stick it in your >>> software and charge >>> $500,000 dollars. >>> >>> Microsoft .NET is under the Apache license. >>> Apache license: it allows use of the source code for the development >>> of proprietary software as well as free and open source software. >>> Apache is preferred by coporations because it imposes few restriction >>> on source code usage. This is why SAS uses .NET instead of Java. >>> >>> It has nothing to do with software quality. >>> I don't think everthing is open in .NET, ie certain key stacks - >>> beyond the scope of my knowledge. >>> As far as windows 'open source' minimally it would be nice if >>> Microsoft made available the source >>> code for all the crtical APIs, like windows explorer. >>> I think there are even more issues with C# and its relation to .NET. >>> (Microsoft charging for C##) >>> I don't see why a company cant develop an Enterprise .NET(usng .NET >>> code) along with C## and charge for it. >>> >>> SOAPBOX ON: >>> >>>=A0=A0=A0I couple of lines in a license or contract/license can make all= the >>> difference. >>> >>>=A0=A0=A0Microsoft is where it is because of a few lines in a contract/ >>> license with IBM that allowed MS to develop the MS-DOS >>> operating system. There used to be an IBM-DOS and a MS-DOS. What >>> microsoft did was put some horrible GUI on 16bit DOS >>> and sucker the public into using it. With the GUI as an anchor >>> microsoft developed inferior MS-WORD(Wordperfect was much beter) >>> and excel(lotus was better). SAS is now using the EG GUI to sucker >>> executives and bean counters to eliminating Windows and SAS-connect. >>> It's al about the almighty dollar. SAS seeks the SAP fortune, however >>> along with SAS-SAP comes a much lower quality SAS. >>> >>> SOAPBOX OFF: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> SOAPBOX ON; >>> >>> Microsoft did change the .NET from a weaker 'Community License' to the >>> Appache license a couple of years ago. >>> Users often tend to be supecious of Microsoft because it does things >>> like issue fixes to operating systems like Vista and >>> then has the nerve to charge for Windows 7. >>> >>> Also Microsoft has the best lawyers in the business. >CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:=A0 This electronic message contains >information which may be legally confidential and or privileged and >does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer >relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional >express written confirmation to that effect.=A0 The information is >intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access >by anyone else is unauthorized.=A0 If you are not the intended >recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the >contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful.=A0 If >you have received this electronic transmission in error, please >reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message >in error, and delete it.=A0 Thank you.
From: Alan Churchill on 9 Mar 2010 11:18
When I started out with determining the sas7bdat layout, my goal was to open source the entire project. I really don't care much for open source but I felt that it would be better to do this once, as a community, and move on. After spending a lot of time researching things, I cannot open source the code nor the map. To reveal the layout is a violation of copyright. Open sourcing the code is the same as publishing the layout. I preside over a non-profit and the biggest issue with a non-paying job is no one wants to do it (imagine that). All of this talk about best for the community ignores the fact that only a few people will ever do the leg work and make it happen. Others will then swoop in and reap the rewards. It is very much the little red hen. Finally, I capped the code at June of this year because I do not expect an alpha version to go on forever. Will I try and sell it? Sure, but I don't have a marketing plan so it isn't imminent. Alan Alan Churchill Savian www.savian.net Office: (719) 687-5954 Cell: (719) 310-4870 -----Original Message----- From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of xlr82sas Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 1:17 PM To: SAS-L(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R On Mar 7, 10:31 am, j...(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG (Jack Hamilton) wrote: > I'm not sure why you keep bringing up SAP. If I wanted an example of a company that takes good products and ruins them, I would choose Computer Associates or Symantec (primarily because they have general-purpose products that I'm familiar with, where SAP has a special purpose product I'm not familiar with). What is the point of the comparison with SAP? > > -- > Jack Hamilton > j...(a)alumni.stanford.org > Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. > > On Mar 6, 2010, at 1:36 pm, xlr82sas wrote: > > > > > On Mar 6, 10:12 am, j...(a)STANFORDALUMNI.ORG (Jack Hamilton) wrote: > >> The problem with .NET is that it restricts programs to being run on Windows. > > >> In theory, some programs could run on other platforms using Mono, but I'll believe that when SAS Institute gives us the Mac version of Enterprise Guide. > > >> -- > >> Jack Hamilton > >> j...(a)alumni.stanford.org > >> Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt. > > >> On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:19 pm, Alan Churchill wrote: > > >>> Never going to happen on the .NET front and SAS was right to choose it (they > >>> should do more .NET, not less). > > >>> Also, name a product where Microsoft charges outrageous fees for underlying > >>> code? .NET is required to run Windows so it is core technology and most of > >>> the code base has been released to the public. > > >>> Java, BTW, is solely owned by Sun. What other technology is proposed for > >>> creating UIs? > > >>> Alan > > >>> Alan Churchill > >>> Savian > >>>www.savian.net > >>> Office: (719) 687-5954 > >>> Cell: (719) 310-4870 > > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of > >>> xlr82sas > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:22 PM > >>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > >>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R > > >>> On Mar 4, 11:01 am, stringplaye...(a)YAHOO.COM (Dale McLerran) wrote: > >>>> --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> wrote: > > >>>>> From: Jonathan Goldberg <jgoldb...(a)BIOMEDSYS.COM> > >>>>> Subject: Re: Why SAS programmers need to be aware of perl and R > >>>>> To: SA...(a)LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > >>>>> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 8:55 AM Three little points: > > >>>>> 1) > >>>>> Dale: > >>>>> You're not really taking exception; I wrote: > >>>>>>> that's why the R interface in in IML; OTHER PARTS OF SAS don't > >>>>>>> have any data type that loosely corresponds to an R frame. > >>>>> In other words, I agree that an R frame and a SAS data set are very > >>>>> similar; it's just that only IML has any facilities for manipulating > >>>>> SAS data sets as entities. (Unless perhaps you count the table > >>>>> processing language). > > >>>> Jonathan, > > >>>> Can you elaborate on the facilities in IML for manipulating data sets > >>>> as entities. I'm afraid that I don't understand your argument. > > >>>> Also, why must a SAS data set be mapped into an R data frame as an > >>>> entity? > > >>>> Dale > > >>>> --------------------------------------- > >>>> Dale McLerran > >>>> Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center > >>>> mailto: dmclerra(a)NO_SPAMfhcrc.org > >>>> Ph: (206) 667-2926 > >>>> Fax: (206) 667-5977 > >>>> ---------------------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>> Hi Sas-Lers, > > >>> Proc matrix was part of base SAS and had a couple of nice properties on > >>> big IBM mainframes. > > >>> 1. It had limited but useful 128bit numeric capabilites(way ahead > >>> of its time) > >>> 2. It used IBM's separate 'hardware vector engine' for fast > >>> parallel vector operations (way ahead of its time) > > >>> SOAPBOX ON: > > >>> I made heavy use of 'proc matrix' and when SAS decided to rip it out of > >>> base and charge very high fees for large two sided 8 way mainframes, my > >>> management was not pleased. > > >>> SAS did provide a translator from Matrix to IML. > > >>> Here is what scares me at SAS: > > >>> 1. It looks like Enterprise Guide is the window to future SAS and > >>> SAS_SAP. Also it looks like EG is somehow in bed with Microsoft's > >>> proprietary .NET. Suppose Microsoft comes out with a Starship Enterprise > >>> Version of .NET and decides to charge $500,000 dollars for Startship > >>> Enterprise .NET. SAS is also prety good at playing this game. > > >>> 2. I worry about EG as a poison pill for programmers and companies. > >>> Suppose programmers get sucked into the givaway EG. SAS throws in IOM, > >>> metadata servers, stored processes, data architechure tools .. low cost at > >>> first. Then comes the 'proc matrix' hammer and programmers and companies > >>> have to pony up with massive spending increases or massive reprogramming to > >>> move away from SAS-SAP. For instance if the once free components of EG, like > >>> proc matrix, are now enterprise versions at extra cost. > > >>> I think EG should reflect the future costs now. It should be priced at > >>> least 2x Windows Base SAS + SAS-Connect. Companies need to take a close look > >>> at future IT costs and SAS's revenue strategy with respect to EG. Just look > >>> at the costs asssociated with SAP. I also don't like it when SAS gives away > >>> 'ODS GRAHICS' and then charges for it later. I know this in not strickly > >>> bait and switch, but it smells. > > >>> I also find it very hypocritical for SAS to complain openly about an > >>> inefficient interface to Oracle, when SAS does not even have a silient ODBC > >>> product. > > >>> SOAPBOX OFF:- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > I am not a lawyer but the details of licenses and contracts is in the > > fine print. > > > SUN Java -- GNU GPLv2 License > > I believe Java is licensed under popular GNU GPLv2 terms. > > Everything associated Java language, Java class libraries .... is open > > Code isolation is required, my drop downs are ok because I do not > > interact with R, perl or Java with > > changes at JAVA source code level. > > I don't think you can make changes to Java code and stick it in your > > software and charge > > $500,000 dollars. > > > Microsoft .NET is under the Apache license. > > Apache license: it allows use of the source code for the development > > of proprietary software as well as free and open source software. > > Apache is preferred by coporations because it imposes few restriction > > on source code usage. This is why SAS uses .NET instead of Java. > > > It has nothing to do with software quality. > > I don't think everthing is open in .NET, ie certain key stacks - > > beyond the scope of my knowledge. > > As far as windows 'open source' minimally it would be nice if > > Microsoft made available the source > > code for all the crtical APIs, like windows explorer. > > I think there are even more issues with C# and its relation to .NET. > > (Microsoft charging for C##) > > I don't see why a company cant develop an Enterprise .NET(usng .NET > > code) along with C## and charge for it. > > > SOAPBOX ON: > > > I couple of lines in a license or contract/license can make all the > > difference. > > > Microsoft is where it is because of a few lines in a contract/ > > license with IBM that allowed MS to develop the MS-DOS > > operating system. There used to be an IBM-DOS and a MS-DOS. What > > microsoft did was put some horrible GUI on 16bit DOS > > and sucker the public into using it. With the GUI as an anchor > > microsoft developed inferior MS-WORD(Wordperfect was much beter) > > and excel(lotus was better). SAS is now using the EG GUI to sucker > > executives and bean counters to eliminating Windows and SAS-connect. > > It's al about the almighty dollar. SAS seeks the SAP fortune, however > > along with SAS-SAP comes a much lower quality SAS. > > > SOAPBOX OFF: > > > SOAPBOX ON; > > > Microsoft did change the .NET from a weaker 'Community License' to the > > Appache license a couple of years ago. > > Users often tend to be supecious of Microsoft because it does things > > like issue fixes to operating systems like Vista and > > then has the nerve to charge for Windows 7. > > > Also Microsoft has the best lawyers in the business.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Hi SAS-Lers, The devil is in the details I know that some companies are working on products that will read and more importantly write SAS datasets without SAS. Also I know that at least one product will fail to work after June of this year. I think these companies plan on selling the software. I hope these companies will consider the more restrictive GPLv2 license instead of the Appache license and publish all the source code. Also it would be nice if all the source code (C#, .NET ...) was made available, as a gesture to the SAS community. GPLv2(SUN JAVA - last time I looked) You are allowed to sell copies of the modified program commercially, but only under the terms of the GNU GPL. Thus, for instance, you must make the source code available to the users of the program as described in the GPL, and they must be allowed to redistribute and modify it as described in the GPL. These requirements are the condition for including the GPL-covered code you received in your program. ============================================================================ ================================================= As for word perfect, I have had several users who prefer the command line stucture of WP. Also there are major US govermental agencies still using WP. ============================================================================ ================================================== As for SAP. EG seems to be a window to products that integrate tools for managing ans enterprises. I am not a SAP expert but some of these SAS tools remind me of SAP. Only SAS can answer the SAP question. The document stating the stategic direction for EG would be nice. |