>>Hi Jim,
>>Yes he can use 'again' a cursor. However that doesn't change cursor's exclusivity, it's still in excusive use. Memo bloat is already an expected thing with or w/o use again.
>>Cetin
>
>No, I don't think so (memo bloat 'expected').
>VFP handles memo fields differently depending on if the table is exclusive or not.
>Many of us who tried tests to reduce memo bloat got caught be this little fact, things working nicely in exclusive tables changing characteristics when tables were SHARED.
>
>Now technically an exclusively USEd cursor would still be exclusive if USEd AGAIN. As I said, I'm reaching in this 'theory', but it may defy VFPs internal logic that a table used twice is 'exclusive' for both instances.
>
>I dunno.

"No, I don't think so (memo bloat 'expected').
VFP handles memo fields differently depending on if the table is exclusive or not."

That's news to me. How? It bloats as I showed in few lines of code sample.
Cetin