Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:46:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Fehd, Ronald J. (PHPPO)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: "Fehd, Ronald J. (PHPPO)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Subject: Re: %include versus SAS Autocall Facility
> From: Lex Jansen
> libnames: I even want to take it a step further.
> The advantage of setting up a standard folder structure, with
> a well-defined purpose for every folder takes away the need
> for users to define file references or libnames.
> Get organized! <---<<<
which makes it easier to one day change the sign to:
<sigh> ... one of these daze
> Let's get global now.
> Have the same structure and AUTOEXEC.SAS, global standard
> macros, etc.. in US, Japan, Europe.... Because all libnames
> are defined in the AUTOEXEC.SAS (and relative !!) we can just
> copy the program from the US to Japan and it still runs
> without ANY modification.
> Needless to say that the key is STANDARDIZATION.
well, I'll stay speechless for this one
for an earlier thread that addresses common folder naming conventions
check our most excellent archives:
subject contains: poll: directory structure
since: Sept 2000
until: Dec 2000
Ron Fehd the macro maven CDC Atlanta GA USA RJF2@cdc.gov