KK> But why do you need a separate variable at all?
 KK> char *DimChar(char *pszP, int iLen = 19)
 KK> {
 KK>    delete []pszP;
 KK>    pszP = new char[iLen + 1];
 KK>    return pszP;
 KK> }
 KK> Here you have the ability to enlarge your string to any
 KK> size with a default value of 19, plus 1 for '\0'.
Good point, I just used a quick example.  My real question was about
whether this would raise any objections, or if there's a better way to
get the job done.  I was confused about the way pointers were passed to
a function, and I still am to be honest about it!!  :-)
 KK> The lack of a test for NULL on the delete is troublesome,
 
I have never heard of testing the results of delete, I thought it
returned void???  I have been checking new allocations though...
1) set_new_handler(some_exit_func);
   which is easiest for me, because it doesn't require checking every
   time I use new, it just calls my function and exits with an error
   message about insufficient memory if new fails...
2) set_new_handler(0);
   tells compiler to make new return a 0 (the old behavior) instead of
   throwing an exception.  I haven't used exceptions at all, I'm still
   trying to learn the basics of c++ but I'm getting there!
L8r,
bw
... 903!brainwave@river.chattanooga.net
--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.20
---------------