I don't get the point of that, I know it's VBA.

Whatever, does the suggested solution work for you and is the explanation
understood.

Regards,
Peter T

PS I should make it clear all of what I have written and suggested is based
on my interpretation of your OP, which may not be correct)

"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote in message
...
Yes, this is VBA, but remember, even though it's VBA, VBA in 2000, 2002,
and 2003 (not sure about 2007) is still based on VB6, though obviously not
the full set of VB6 codes.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000
"Peter T" <peter_t@discussions wrote in message
...
Ronald, if I may say you are making this excessively complicated :-)

In your OP you said you had -
"public method and/or property that is setup within a worksheet module"
also you want to loop these worksheets. If your code is in worksheet
modules it is "VBA", and if you want to use a worksheet Object it is part
of Excel's object model. Whether thereafter you want your loop in VBA,
VB6 or .Net or any other language is irrelevant.

Try this simple test

at the top of EACH worksheet module
Public a as Long

in a normal module

Sub Test()
dim i as long
Dim obj as Object

For each obj in Worksheets
i = i + 10
obj.a = i
debug.? obj.a
next

End Sub

Run test and you should see 10, 20, 30 (assuming 3 worksheets) in the
immediate window. .

Now change 'As Object' to 'As Worksheet'.

It'll fail for the same reason your code fails. Simply because ' a ' is
not a property of a worksheet as defined in the relevant typelib

An alternative approach, and perhaps a better one, would be to subclass
your worksheets using WithEvents. Then you can include whatever
additional methods and properties you wish and get the intellisense, no
binding issues etc. You could maintain these classes in whatever app you
are working with, eg outside workbook or even outside Excel depending on
your app.

Regards,
Peter T


"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote in message
...
The only reason why I can think of doing that, the Object data type is
similar to the Variant data type except it does have to refer to a class
module as an object. With that, instead of the variable being bound at
compile time, it would be bound at run time.

While this may be of benefit, if there comes a time when MS Office goes
to VB.NET base code (Not sure of MS Office 2007 is already like that or
not), then I would like to spend as little time converting code over to
VB.NET format. While VB.NET does allow for the Object data type, it's
very restrictive on what is and what is not allowed. It's already bad
enough that error trapping codes [among other adjustments] would have to
be modified in so many places when going from the VB6 base code to
VB.NET base code. If this happens, a lot of people will be abruptly
awakened by the various restrictions of VB.NET such as can't use the
Variant data type, and must explicitly declare all variables. Wouldn't
be able to imply which parent object such coded variable is refering to
nearly as easily as done in the VB6 base code. When stepping through
code, rather than it compiling on demand, when one makes an adjustment
to code while debugging, program is using the compiled code and the
change the develop makes wouldn't take effect until the code is compiled
again. GoTo's and other similar statements are no longer allowed in the
.NET environment. Error trapping is done via the Try...Catch...Final
blocks. MS did this stuff to force people to use more of the good
programming practices, so as when debugging, it's much easier to catch
things. Of course, not all of the good programming practice rules can
be enforced like this as people can still use names that's not so easy
to tell what they are, formatting issues, and what ever else there may
be.

A couple of the benefits though of VB.NET would be that it would be
compiled into MSIL, so as multiple programming languages can be used for
the same code (in some cases, VB wouldn't be able to be used, but more
so C#), and instead of having to create multiple methods/properties,
each method and property can have multiple signatures.

These are just a few of the several differences between the 2 base
codes.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000
"Peter T" <peter_t@discussions wrote in message
...
Why is that?

Try it, I'm sure you will then work out why.

Regards,
Peter T

"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote in message
...
Why is that? I am a strong believer of good programming practice,
which includes avoiding ambiguities whenever possible, which should be
nearly 100% of the time, if not 100% of the time. About the only time
I can see when ambiguity may not be avoided would be dealing with late
binding due to other limitations and the lack of being able to bind at
compile time.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000
"Peter T" <peter_t@discussions wrote in message
...
If I follow what you are trying to say, and it's a highly dubious if!

Declare l_wsh As Object ' note not as worksheet

Regards,
Peter T

"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote in message
...
From within a class modules, is there a viable way to call on a
public method and/or property that is setup within a worksheet
module?

I have setup a procedure with the following signatu

Public Sub pcdInitializeWorksheet(ByRef l_objScheduleRangeNames As
clsScheduleRangeNames)

and within the class module that is attempting to call on it, it's
setup as:

l_wsh.pcdInitializeWorksheet m_objScheduleRangeNames

The object variable "l_wsh" is within a For Each...Next loop, which
is a worksheet object.

At the time it's compiling, it's erroring out stating the above
method, "pcdInitializeWorksheet", is not found. If I comment out
that one line of code, everything compiles just fine.

If it's not feasible to use worksheet modules as such, then I will
be left with no choice but to emulate the worksheets.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000