Hi Jim,

Well, I'm delighted you agree, I sometimes find I get these ideas into my head and I go off on a lonely crusade. What usually happens is I make some blasphemous comment and people start ignoring me :-) Just wait till I let rip with my error handling technique, I'll be branded a witch! :-O

Ta ta, (I noticed the British salutation so I thought I would reciprocate)
Darrel


>Darrel,
>
>I just want you to know that I'm with you on this one, and I'm glad to see you persisting with it.
>
>Even if one went ahead and concocted test situations with NODEFAULT at every conceivable spot, "observation" alone would basically be fruitless because you could never tell what else was done that simple has no visible trace.
>
>Obviously, many people feel they are getting along without this knowledge. It is my contention that we *all* would get along with things much better, possibly even writing much "cleaner" apps, IF WE WERE TOLD THE DETAILS OF THIS NATURE.
>As I wrote elsewhere today, I cannot see haow better documentation can hurt a product.
>
>The best I can see right now, given the documentation at hand, is that I really am 'taking a chance' with *any* app I write today, because "THEY" could change the "default" behaviours tomorrow and my app could tank because of that. Sure, it is not likely to happen. But "not likely" is not really good enough for a computer application.
>
>This is probably '*issing into the wind', but at least I feel some relief in getting it off my chest.
>
>Cheers (and persist)
>Jim N
>