An interesting example, but I would draw the opposite conclusion: Use the dot unless there's a reason not to.

In general, though, I think that most people who are using triple ampersands have gotten in over their heads. In my experience, it's been beginners rather than experts who have felt a need for multiply-resolved macro variables.

I have probably seen questions about them on SAS-L more times than I have had personal need for them. If it's confusing, I try to find way not to do it, and usually there is such a way.

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:37:17 -0400, "Don Henderson" <donaldjhenderson@HOTMAIL.COM> said: > Jack, > > Take a look at: > > http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0804B&L=sas-l&P=R18071 > > And thanks for asking this question, it reminded me that I did not create > the article on www.sasCommunity.org on the rules for macro variable > resolution. I will try to do that later today and then post the link so > others can comment on it and improve it. > > Again, my primary opposition to this is that it introduces confusion into > the understanding of how SAS parses complex macro variable references. > For > simple references, the dot adds very little. For complex references, it > adds > complexity and confusion. > > Regards, > donh > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On > > Behalf Of Jack Clark > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:20 AM > > To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > > Subject: Always ending macro variables with a dot (was tip: > > Macro Design Checklist) > > > > I am interested in hearing more user's views on whether it is > > good practice to always end macro variables with a dot (.). > > I attended Ron Fehd's presentation at NESUG 2007 and he > > suggested always ending macro variables with a dot (.). Now > > another expert on SAS-l (Don Henderson) has suggested the opposite. > > > > > > Don - can you give some examples where an unnecessary dot at > > the end of a macro variable could cause problems? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jack Clark > > > > > > > > > > > > Jack Clark > > Research Analyst > > phone: 410-455-6256 > > fax: 410-455-6850 > > jclark@hilltop.umbc.edu > > > > University of Maryland, Baltimore County Sondheim Hall, 3rd > > Floor 1000 Hilltop Circle Baltimore, MD 21250 > > > > > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information > > that is legally privileged and that is intended only for the > > use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the > > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > > disclosure, copying of this e-mail, distribution, or action > > taken in reliance on the contents of this e-mail and/or > > documents attributed to this e-mail is strictly prohibited. > > If you have received this information in error, please notify > > the sender immediately by phone and delete this entire > > e-mail. Thank you.-----Original Message----- > > From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On > > Behalf Of Don Henderson > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:21 AM > > To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > > Subject: Re: tip: Macro Design Checklist > > > > Roland, > > > > I have to (pretty emphatically) disagree with you on your > > comment below. > > My > > rationale can be found at: > > > > http://www.sascommunity.org/wiki/Talk:Macro_Design_Issues_Checklist > > > > By discussing this on the Talk page, a concensus can be > > reached and the main article can be updated as appropriate to > > present a balanced view of the differing positions. > > > > I commented as well on the convention to always end a macro > > variable reference with a dot (.) - a convention that I find > > to not be a good idea in general. > > > > Regards, > > -don h > >

-- Jack Hamilton Sacramento, California jfh@alumni.stanford.org <== Use this, not jfh@stanfordalumni.org