Hi Alan,

That is a great idea - I will definately run with this one to see
where it takes me.

Glad you like it.

Re my "Big point", I meant to add that updating progress 000's of times
might take longer than the actual routine on its own - though I see not an
issue for you.

One question:

If I use GetObject to create a reference in NewExcel to OldExcel (and
then I can presumably directly control any object in OldExcel from
within NewExcel including OldExcel.StatusBar) I will have a reference
in both directions (OldExcel will contain NewExcel and NewExcel will
contain an Object that is OldExcel).

Exactly, cross referrenced instances of Excel, each can manipulate the
other.

In general is that an issue?

Possibly, let's take the least problematic ref first - "xlOld" in NewExcel.

I don't know if you want this as Public for later use, or as a one off at
procedure level while doing your stuff. In either case eventually it should
be set to Nothing. In the example I declared it Public, not knowing how you
want to use it as a precaution I set it to nothing in the Auto_close. But do
that where ever is most appropriate.

"xlNew" in ExcelOld is the one to be concerned with if has been used to
create the new instance. Eventually it should be set to nothing but NOT
until after NewExcel is closed, either programatically or manually. In the
worst case, if NewExcel is not visible, you won't be able to close it
without using the task manager, or Ctrl Alt Del and looking for "Excel" and
End task.

If you are opening your wb in a new instance to do a specific task (visible
?) after which you no longer need the new instance, do this:

wb.close false ' or true ?
set wb = nothing
xlNew.quit
set xlNew = nothing

If wb and/or NewExcel could have been closed by other means, run the above
under "On Error resume next".

Re-reading my Test proc I see that I set xlNew to nothing with NewExcel
still open. Not a major problem as I also made NewExcel visible. However
running this several times might lead to a memory leak. Having said that I
didn't notice any problems testing a few times.

Conceptually (I am weak on this), I tend to think of object 'trees'
with each object being a branch off of its parent. However, in this
case we have a circular loop of 'containers'. Is that likely to store
up potential issues?

I don't see these cross ref's as a "circular loop of 'containers'", so
providing the above precautions are followed I don't think there should be
any problems. But if anyone wants to step in and say otherwise ... I'll be
interested myself.

Regards,
Peter T