Date:         Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:43:11 +0100
Reply-To:     Christian Lensbjerg <christian.lensbjerg@ALMBRAND.DK>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Christian Lensbjerg <christian.lensbjerg@ALMBRAND.DK>
Subject:      Re: macros

test
"Richard Ristow" <wrristow@MINDSPRING.COM> skrev i en meddelelse
news:5.1.0.14.2.20040618122453.0669ee30@pop.mindspring.com...
> At 09:40 AM 6/18/2004, Fehd, Ronald J. (PHPPO) wrote:
>
> >Quentin McMullen [mailto:quentin_mcmullen@BROWN.EDU] had written,
> >
> >>One of the reasons I'm happy to help out and train new SAS programmers
is
> >>that I never cease to be amazed by how much I learn from them.  It seems
> >>safe to say that it's hard to read a program and not learn *something*
from it.
> >
> >I find that explaining something to someone else forces me to choose
words
> >in the description, that I may later have second thoughts about.
> >-- one of the hazards of being a Myers-Briggs INFP:
> >    "overly thoughtful"
> >    goes to show what those Extroverts know!
> >    would you believe: "-thoroughly- thought-full"  <chuckle> --
> >
> >I have found that writing up my routines for SUG publication and
> >presentation has been an eye-opener every time.
>
> Exactly; and a very well-known phenomenon: you REALLY learn something by
> teaching it. I've heard of mathematics professors saying thins like, "Can
I
> teach complex analysis next semester? I need to brush it up for a paper
I'm
> writing."
>
> I'd be surprised if it is at all limited within the Myers-Briggs, or any
> other, spectrum.
>
> >I have found that writing up my routines for SUG publication and
> >presentation has been an eye-opener every time.
>
> Writing is very good, and does clarify your own thoughts a great deal.
It's
> probably not quite as good as teaching. In writing, it's easy to leave out
> precisely the fundamentals that are so much a part of you that you've
> stopped thinking about them. (I'm sure we've all seen this in many
manuals.)