I believe using a macro or python is valuable when you want to do the
same procedure with systematic variation in parts of the commands. They
are more likely to be useful in a data processing environment than in a
data analysis environment.
If I understand correctly, there are few things that can be done with
macros that cannot be done in Python. Whereas there are many things
that can be done with python but not with macros. <don protective
anti-flame gear> New data processing procedures should not use macros.
They are obsolete. The only reason to use them is to save time writing
due to lack of knowledge of Python. <remove protective anti-flame gear>
One approach.
Before we had macros and python we would write syntax using strings as
the stand-in variables. Then we would use a text editor to globally
replace those strings and concatenate the sets of syntax. Macros, IIRC,
grew out of that approach. If you expand a macro and print it that is
very much what macros do.
If you only need to expand the syntax once, would it help to expand the
macro and cut-and-paste from the output file to a new syntax file.
It seems that the time to expand the macro would be a result of how many
different new sets it needs to generate.
Another approach.
SPLIT FILE can be used in some circumstances.
Another approach.
Do many variables on a pass and cut-and-paste from the output.
Perhaps if you describe what you would like to do in more detail,
members on this list who are more fluent in macros and python could
offer more concrete suggestions.
Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants
On 4/17/2011 2:38 AM, drfg2008 wrote:
> When you use a macro, the macro first 'inflates' the actual syntax within the
> macro and then executes the commands (as far as I understand). For example,
> if a macro shall execute a set of commands repeatedly, the whole syntax is
> first 'inflated' and then executed. This may lead to a long time between
> calling the macro and executing it. Now, is there a 'workaround' if you have
> to repeat a makro (that you can't change) for let's say millions of times
> (which could lead to a standstill) ? Maybe with python (?)
>
> Thanks
>
> -----
> Dr. Frank Gaeth
> FU Berlin
>
> --
> View this message in context:
http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/SPSS-Macro-tp4308532p4308532.html> Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
>
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD
>
=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD
Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants
Locked
