## Sum statement (not sum function) question?

Solved
Super Contributor
Posts: 338

# Sum statement (not sum function) question?

Hi Forum,

Could anyone help me to undestand the red colored piece of this code?

/*Sorting in preparation for "By-group processing" - I understand this  */

PROC SORT DATA=A;

BY ID_NUM;

run;

/*By-group processing- I understand this  */

DATA A1 A2;

SET A  ;

BY ID_NUM;

## LOAN_RECEIVER + 1; /*Sum statement (not sum function) which returns accumulated total, am I correct?*/

IF FIRST.ID_NUM THEN LOAN_RECEIVER = 1;

IF LOAN_RECEIVER = 1 THEN OUTPUT A1;

ELSE IF LOAN_RECEIVER = 2 THEN OUTPUT A2;

RUN;

Q:

LOAN_RECEIVER + 1; is the Sum statement (not sum function) which returns accumulated total, am I correct?

Thanks

Miris

Accepted Solutions
Solution
‎02-23-2014 02:42 PM
Posts: 5,523

## Re: Sum statement (not sum function) question?

Miris,

The LOAN_RECEIVER + 1; statement is just equivalent to LOAN_RECEIVER = LOAN_RECEIVER + 1;, except for two side effects that are implied by LOAN_RECEIVER being the target of the sum statement. First, LOAN_RECEIVER value is RETAINed from one iteration to the next, second, LOAN_RECEIVER is initialized with zero.

So, you see, the statement RETAIN LOAN_RECEIVER 0; is not needed at all, as both statement's effects are already implied. Try removing it. you should see no change.

PG

PG

All Replies
Super User
Posts: 5,876

## Re: Sum statement (not sum function) question?

Yes you are correct.The retain statement is unnecessary since variables in a sum statement are retained by default.

Data never sleeps
Solution
‎02-23-2014 02:42 PM
Posts: 5,523

## Re: Sum statement (not sum function) question?

Miris,

The LOAN_RECEIVER + 1; statement is just equivalent to LOAN_RECEIVER = LOAN_RECEIVER + 1;, except for two side effects that are implied by LOAN_RECEIVER being the target of the sum statement. First, LOAN_RECEIVER value is RETAINed from one iteration to the next, second, LOAN_RECEIVER is initialized with zero.

So, you see, the statement RETAIN LOAN_RECEIVER 0; is not needed at all, as both statement's effects are already implied. Try removing it. you should see no change.

PG

PG
🔒 This topic is solved and locked.