>Hi Ed,
>
>>This would be better than public variables, because the accessing syntax would at least have to use the object name to get to the property, and so local variables wouldn't stomp on the globals, but IMHO, it's still bad design.
>
>Probably, thats why I was asking.
>
>>Almost always, in my experience, there is a way to classify and/or group variables like these, and put them in an object where they logically belong. But to be honest, most things like this I put in my application object. But there aren't many. What kinds of things do you propose might justify a generic "variables" object?
>
>I considered a wrapper class for NewObject that would make it possible to return values, because I just don't get how to do it. The only thing I can think of it pass a THIS and have the NewObject fullfill a property on the old form or class, but that only works if your on an object. So I consdered a global variable class or the exact same thing and call it a "oNewObjectReturnValue". Hmm, can you pass the variable by reference to NewObject? I remeber testing it but it was failing on something.

Out of curiosity, why would you want a return value from new object besides the object reference? Let's have some background here :-)