Michael,

The only other issue might be performance related with macro expansion like that, but it may be entirely tolerable for your app.

>The main reason I am considering sending the property names to the functions is because the library will be re-usable. It's a set of routines for automating the creation of Excel spreadsheets, and I want the routines to be flexible enough that they would not need to know which property names are being referenced.
>
>For example, in my SubTotal function, it relies on an array which contains the row numbers of all the subtotals, which is updated by the function. This array is later referenced by the GrandTotal function. Since the array is part of an object, I figured I would send both the object and property name. This way, I don't need to be concerned with being exactly consistent with naming conventions in my calling procedures.