=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:01:41 -0500
Reply-To:     "Beadle, ViAnn" <viann@spss.com>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Beadle, ViAnn" <viann@spss.com>
Subject:      Re: reverse concat
Comments: To: "Marks, Jim" <Jim.Marks@lodgenet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

So you force a pass of data anyway, plus some sorting of hash table, and output generation. I find that my gnarly problems usually involve strings or dates for which aggregation only confuses my error.

________________________________

From: Marks, Jim [mailto:Jim.Marks@lodgenet.com]
Sent: Wed 7/12/2006 12:41 PM
To: Beadle, ViAnn; SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: RE: Re: reverse concat




When I'm working on "gnarly transformation problems", I mostly use FREQ,
CROSS, or DESC instead of EXECUTE. That way, I can see the results of
the transformations (to debug the coding).

I have large datsets, so I do have extra processing costs, (usually made
worse by tring to multi-task.) In the bad old days, it was walk to the
library and read through "Sociological Abstracts" while waiting for the
error log/ output :~).

--jim



-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
Beadle, ViAnn
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 7:04 AM
To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: reverse concat

OK, I'll take your bait.

I don't actually use EXECUTE in syntax but when I'm work out gnarly
transformation problems I frequently Run Pending Transformations (which
generates your dreaded EXECUTE) from the data editor and see the effects
of my transformations immediately. My strategy is to work through the
problem a "executable" unit at a time and check out the unit by running
the pending transformations. Unless your dealing with wide (more than
200 or so variables) or long (more than 10,000) or more cases the time
to actually do the transformation is much less than the think time to
step mentally through the process.

What does that extra processing really cost you? It's not like the bad
old days when every job submittal at $1.00 a pop ate up my account at
the University of Chicago Comp Center.

________________________________

From: SPSSX(r) Discussion on behalf of Richard Ristow
Sent: Tue 7/11/2006 7:02 PM
To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: reverse concat



OK, I guess most of you know my diatribe. Many thanks to Jim Marks and
for noting this in thread "Easy problem".

<big snip/>


The logic looks fine. But the EXECUTE statements *are not recommended*.
They contribute nothing; they slow processing, by forcing the whole file
to be read for each one.

Now, diatribe isn't always the best way to make a point. Would anybody
who's an 'EXECUTE' user, like to say why the statement seems to be a