>Yes, but they don't need to know how to use the class at all. In fact, they don't even need to be aware there is class that do most of the work.

Ahh, I see what you're accomplishing now. I thought you meant something else. I agree, thats a good way of doing it (I do it all the time), but that requires you to create a wrapper for every single class, and, if you want to use the class in a way the wrapper doesn't expect, you will need to use the class directly and then you are required to find out what private variables need to be around for everything to be peachy.

It seems to me, that your technique is just hiding complexity of calling the class and setting the environment. If thats so, why not do it the OOP way and hide that complexity? It would allow the class to be used implictly by your UDF, or directly as a class since its now encapsulated.