absolute minimum. So simply put, creating an additional column, filling it with with the necessary values, and calling ASORT() is always going to be more efficient, than writing a sort routine yourself. Note that I haven't even addressed the issue of swapping the array elements, which will add additional overhead.
>
>If you want one more reason to go with ASORT() consider that you're calling a native function against your tokenized pcode.
>
>Regards,

Yep... did it that way... readin the asort docs, it seems to say that it will do what I needed, but it didn't. Of course, if I did create a UDF I would use asort to do all the real work.

Thanks,
BOb