The LinkedIn opener did not parse - "A SAS numeric missing is not a lone wolf.
It is 28." - and reading the rest of the post and its LinkedIn version together
turned up a further set of style defects:
- the article opener made the missing value the wolf, and padded the count
- "All numeric values means numeric; all strings means character" was clumsy
- procedure and function names were lowercase in places (proc means, cats,
options MISSING), and "and friends" was too casual for a list of procedures
- "gotcha" and "harmless" undersold the points they introduced
- "One thing worth knowing" opened two separate paragraphs
- "a value ... and as a value with its own place" repeated itself, in both the
article and the LinkedIn version
- the adapter bullet list mixed trailing periods with none
- the LinkedIn list was split in two by a stray blank line, and "a physical
constraint" did not say which constraint
- "the most common of them" echoed the "28 of them" in the line above
No claims changed - the range-rule behaviour, the period, the primary key and
the strict dropdown all read as they did.
dc
7d950cbdbe