>>Understood. BTW, Mike, I didn't mean to put you on the spot with the question.
>
>When I clicked "reply", I was wondering if that clicking noise was from the mouse or a Claymore. :-) If I was worried about being put on the spot, I wouldn't hang out on the UT. IOW, don't worry about it.

Thanks, but it was something that I should've considered prior to posting it.< s >

>>It's just that it would make dealing with a lot of API calls a lot easier.
>
>Oh, I agree. You've seen my KB articles. The hoops we have to jump through are certain doable, but such a hassle.

Lesse, how many times have I mucked things up by mis-counting the position of a member in a structure when trying to translate it to a string. I don't know...I ran out of fingers and toes long ago.:-)

>> Of course, how useful that would be given VFP's nature and purpose is another >questin entirely.
>
>I think it would be quite useful for Win32 calls, but Microsoft's architecture is moving away from pure API calls to COM-based calls, so maybe it's not something Microsoft wants to encourage nor something devs want to continue to do. I mean, how many things do I solve with a Win32 call only to have you or Ed follow up with a WSH solution?

That's true. I can't imagine, however, that the entire API would eventually be exposed as COM. Then again, I don't have much imagination either.< bg >