Why does SAS change the where-clause conjugates?

[sh0e]

I have noticed that if my where clause looks something like this:

not( missing( ben_per_start_date ) | missing( ben_per_end_date ) )

SAS turns it into this logical equivalence

(not MISSING(ben_per_start_date)) and (not MISSING(ben_per_end_date)

Does this mean that I am coding my original incorrectly or inefficiently?

- Jack

[PGStats]

What evidence do you have that it is doing that?

[sh0e]

That's what I posted.

The first piece of code is from the submitted SAS code.

The second piece of code was lifted from the SAS log.

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[PGStats]

For some obscure reason, SAS/SQL is very poor at handling OR operations. So, I guess it prefers the logical AND equivalent. Since both are logically equivalent, you should use the version that's clearer to you.

[Kurt_Bremser]

When you have an and instead of an or, you can shortcut the condition when the first part is false. This reduces the overall amount of comparisons that must be made.

[sh0e · Accepted solution]

@Kurt_Bremser Are you writing that there are fewer comparisons using the AND operator because in the first expression is false, the second is not evaluated?

[PGStats]

You could say the same thing of an OR operation. If the first operand is true, the second one doesn't need to be evaluated.