>>This reminds me of when I received a bug report for Codeblock. The developer's code would not run under Codeblock, but would when compiled natively. Turns out he was using a variable name of "scan". I could not convince him that this was a bad name...

>Hi Randy,
>
>In fact you do not have to convince it to change "scan" name,
>but you had to convince it to use "m.scan"
>

Fabio,

Yes, and I failed to win that one either. That not being a place where "m." is typically needed (left side of an assignment statement). In reality, he wanted me to fix Codeblock. Nevertheless, seeing that it's a public domain program that produces zero revenue and would never have been created in the first place if FP 2.6 had EXECSCRIPT() in it, I was not so inclined. <bg>

-- Randy