Technology Tales

SAS Macro and Dataline/Cards Statements in Data Step

28^th October 2008

Recently, I tried code like this in a SAS macro:

data sections;
    infile datalines dlm=",";
    input graph_table_number $15. text_line @1 @;
    datalines;
    "11.1           ,Section 11.1",
    "11.2           ,Section 11.2",
    "11.3           ,Section 11.3"
    ;
run;

While it works in its own right, including it as part of a macro yielded this type of result:

ERROR: The macro X generated CARDS (data lines) for the DATA step, which could cause incorrect results.  The DATA step and the macro will stop executing.

A bit of googling landed me on SAS-L where I spotted a solution like this one that didn't involve throwing everything out:

filename temp temp;

data _null_;
    file temp;
    put;
run;

data sections;
    length graph_table_number $15 text_line $100;
    infile temp dlm=",";
    input @;
    do _infile_=
    "11.1           ,Section 11.1",
    "11.2           ,Section 11.2",
    "11.3           ,Section 11.3"
    ;
        input graph_table_number $15. text_line @1 @;
        output;
    end;
run;

filename temp clear;

The filename statement and ensuing data step creates a dummy file in the SAS work area that gets cleared at the end of every session. That seems to fool the macro engine into thinking that input is from a file and not the CARDS/DATALINES method, to which it takes grave exception. The trailing @'s hold an input record for the execution of the next INPUT statement within the same iteration of the DATA step so that the automatic variable _infile_ can be fed as part of the input process in a do block with the output statement ensure that all records from the input buffer reach the data set being created.

While this method does work, I would like to know the underlying reason as to why SAS Macro won't play well with included data entry using DATALINES or CARDS statements in a data step, particularly when it allows other methods that using either SQL insert statements or standard variable assignment in data step. I find it such a curious behaviour that I remain on the lookout for the explanation why it is like this.