Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That makes sense. The best solution would be to just update all > reference to the currently edited macro. Could you enlighten me as to > why this is not possible actually? This would mean that each macro > keeps its own list of reference but I don't see anything wrong with > that. I am not sure what I am saying is making some sense...
What happens if the macro is deleted and a new one with the same name is created? This looks fragile to me. And with undo, there can be several live copies of the same macro. JMarc
