> >
> >I don't think this is a "bug", but rather I *believe* that it is the
> "standard" Xbase way of dealing with "scope".
> >In ordinary folks terms. . . 'if the current work area is at eof(), then
> any other work area is also assumed to be at eof()'.
> >
>
> If it walks like a duck...
>
> >I think it was VFP 3 which introduced the "IN" clause to many of the
> commands, essentially allowing us to address each relevant work area
> specifically, thus overcoming the assumption which is inherent otherwise.
> >
QUACK!!!!
==Carl
==Carl
Carl J. WarnerVFUG OfficerThe early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.