PE> Hi David.  Thought you might be interested in this.  To save you some
PE> time...

db> Huh??

A problem in a LIB file, that requires all applications to be fixed.

db>> No they're not, they're a sack of puss-shit.

db> What's this - I certainly didn't write it, despite the fact you've 
db> attributed it to me.  

I know, I was speeding up the convo.

PE> Documentation for bug in MSC 6.0 regarding open file handles

db> ...I don't give a shit about MSC 6.0, nor the 16-bit world in general.  But 
db> you already knew that.  :-)

It was the buggy .LIB file I was commenting on.

PE> I would expect that no-one is using MSC 6.0 for their new development
PE> anyway (and worried about the file handle problem), so this is of
PE> little interest.

db> Using a DLL would mean fixing the one DLL that had the problem (whatever it 
db> was), replacing the old broken one, and instantly all applications linked 
db> to use that DLL would now be "fixed".  Precisely the idea
behind shared 
db> object code...  With static libs, you have to fix each and every executable 
db> in turn.

I know, that's what I was posting it for.  I still prefer .LIBs though.
Even in this case, it is rare to encounter this error (otherwise it would
have been discovered a long time ago).  BFN.  Paul. 
@EOT:

---