> >If it is running, I'm rather confused, too ;( - this behavior contradits > >all the known behaviors in all the known versions of Fox. Is it possible > >that calling a form shortens up the call chain? > > The default behaviour is for the current program to look within itself for > the function (which forms now don't have) and to look next in the procedure > file(s) and if not there then up the program stack. Therefore, my function > would have been called after the check in the procedure file. If I don't > use a form, then the function exists in the current program and there is no > problem. I thought the procedure library came LAST but it actually comes > Next after the current program. > > This is good to know! (this information is from Randy Pearson. Goes to show > that we should not always rely on what we think we know) This goes to my > second rule of programming: "If you've done everything right and it still > doesn't work then something you did right is wrong." > > Bob You're right - I really did think that execution chain came before the procedure file... and I thought so for years. Well, it's probably because I very rarely use procedure files, and when I use them, it's for some limited time. But I do remember times when I was immensely confused with "which procedure fired", like in the case when the same procedure existed on local directory and along the fox's path, and the .fxps' dates were, er, messed up. BTW, what's the first rule, then?