>>>That's fine, but it's just turning the code he (inexplicably) wants to replace with a function that has teh same code.
>>
>>Oh, I don't think so. How many times do you want to code the IIF statement with all the brackets and quotes vs passing a table name to a function? I think the function route is quicker, cleaner and less susceptible to "fat fingering" the keyboard.<g>
>
>Agreed. No, I'm not decrying the usefulness or sense of the func. But it's just the same code as Jay wanted to avoid, preferring a one-liner for some magic reason.

Bit fiesty today, Terry. Does it matter why I want it? Maybe I just want to see if it can be done.

I actually like the function idea because it let's me use one line of simplified code in all the different places I would need it, with the working code in the function. John made a good point about it being cleaner. I was thinking that it could be done without a function, but perhaps not.