Hi Bruce,
I am missing the point, 'cause I don't know what TLs are!
Quit may smoothen closing, and I have no quarrel with QUITting to get an application to appear to end more smoothly. My only misgiving is that by using QUIT, we may mask other issues. (This is a guess, I admit.) As we get more experience with the issues involved in ending a VFP session, we can improve the code that shuts things down and quit will be superflous. Currently if someone shuts down NT, or Ends Task, my company's code handles this smoothly. However, I'm sure there are issues I'll discover in the future that aren't being address correctly. If I use QUIT, maybe I'll never know... and that's not all bad.

Ed's point of communicating to the OS about how things ended is interesting, and one I haven't thought enought about.

>I think you're missing the point, Charlie. Ordinarily, there's no need whatsoever for a QUIT, and I, in fact was not using it, especially since I only use TLs. However, Ed got me started thinking about it & doing a little testing as to what occurs when, say, a machine is shut down with a vfp session open. In this case, the QUIT actually kicks in and helps "smoothen" the vfp closing process...