On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:53:55 -0500, Rob Gayvert <rtg at rochester.rr.com> wrote: > Sorry, ignore that last so-called fix. Here's one that has a better > chance of working. Still get the (new) instance of the error. At least - it looks like the same error, with the virtual function being called etcetera. I'll look through my code whether I've done anything funny...