I like this quote from Charles Barkley of the Houston Rockets, formerly, of the Philadelphia 76er's, it was directed at an over-zealous reporter.....


"Let there be no conflict... you come after me, I'll beat your ass in the ground.....let there be no conflict...."


>>Hi Jim,
>>
>>*IF* I were just throwing darts to see what happens, then I got an interesting offshoot indeed!
>>
>>I believe that John's answer is incorrect because I believe that the .Name is not the way to "address" a form instantiated by "Do Form" or CreateObject but rather the object reference variable is to be used. Thus it would not at all be a question of "scope" for the variable in question (.Name isn't even a variable so it cannot really go out of scope while the form still lives), but rather that the *wrong* variable is being used.
>>
>>Jim, your quickness to consistently jump to the defense of Mr. Petersen is puzzling to say the least. Your responses *had* always tended to be thorough, complete, accurate and impartial but lately...
>>
>>Jim N
>Jim,
>
>I am not jumping to the defense of anyone at all. I disagree with you.
>
>The original message said that there was a global application object that was trying to refer to a form and the result was that the object did not exist and at the same time the _screen.ActiveForm reference showed that, in fact, the form object in question did exist.
>
>There was no refernce in the message at all as to how the application object was referring to the form, no mention of variables or form name properties. Since every appplication object that I have seen uses an internal variable or property to refer to its forms, I assume that this global application object does the same and that the internal reference to the form in question, whether it be a variable or a property of the application object, has lost its reference to the form.
>
>John's recommendation of using the watch window in the debugger to observe and be allerted when the form reference is lost is a very good and effective method of tracking this problem down.
>
>I read the original question and then saw John's answer and felt it was not helpful to post a duplicate answer.
>
>As for your other inference, well I am a technical advisor here on the UT and I see it as my job to try and stop trouble before it happens. A while ago John was making some noise and waves. Lately it seems there are a nubmer of people baiting him into doing it again. Besides, I find no value in a reply to a question that simply says, "You are incorrect" without giving any further advice or information to the original questioner. A message like that reaks of baiting someone into a flame war. As a Tech Advisor here I see it as my job to try and prevent flame wars between any two people.