>I was hoping you'd see my post. I know you've done a lot of work with these things. I'll give it a whirl. I was hoping for something that was encapsulated, but as long as it works I'll have to let it fly for now.

The other choice you have to use an object to store the elements, instead of an array. Then you might be able to get away with setting the property to .null. I haven't tested that, and really have no idea if that would have the same problem. By the time I'd discovered this (and the solution) there was no way I was going to rewrite the array code. :-(