Annie writes: ≪ If the one place in that frame a func BX would have been--and is absent because it failed--isn't obvious to you, I don't understand why you're even commenting on it. ≫ Oh, it's obvious alright. But since it's also obvious that you haven't the faintest idea how to use BX except in the most rudimentary way, you'll forgive me if I choose not to speculate as to what the absent BX statement might have looked like. Nor, at this point, do I care. -- Carl Distefano cld@xxxxxxxx http://users.datarealm.com/xywwweb/