Thank you Dragan, I actually did consider that option as well, but I was afraid that I may actually at some point in time exceed 65,000 records (gee, I hope not).


>>Yeah, I played around with tracking the number of records to be processed. In this case, these reports were created over a period of 10 years and are called from a myriad of locations in the app. A filter is set in almost every case so if I have to determine the number of matching records, I can do that or spend the time stepping through the table to create the totals (and just return in the function) before the report is actually run everytime as well. Thank you for the idea Nadya. I appreciate it. It may be a faster resolution (when so many reports are involved) than the other option.
>
>I wonder whether a single variable would do that. Maybe an array of reccount() .f. values, and have your function set the recno() element of it to .t. first time it calculates. Then each time it goes through it again, it doesn't calculate for those already visited.
>
>Though I'm still not sure this would work... the function is supposed to calculate stuff sequentially, and keep the result in report level variables. With its own variables, the VFP report driver simply recalculates from the start whenever you go back and forth in the preview. You just can't simulate that in an inline function. This technique may keep it from showing double and triple, but I'm not sure if it wouldn't show you totals of first six pages when you jump back to page 1.
>
>With the amount of reports you have... I don't envy you at all.