>

>DO &cProcName.
>

>
>and create a separate procedure for each "CASE". Or maybe combine some CASEs into one procedure for convenience.

Just want to point that

DO (cProcName)

is faster and safer.

Also, although I agree that this is a better approach than the DO CASE, I'm still concerned about the idea of several hundred similar procedures to maintain. Is there really no commonality that would let you cut this down to a few procedures accepting parameters?

Tamar