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 signature:

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

Since you are calling a public Sub, the l_wsh is inappropriate. The Public
Sub should be in a public module, not a sheet module. If the procedure
pcdInitializeWorksheet is in the public module, the drop the l_wsh from the
call and it should respond.

"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote:

> 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 signature:
>
> 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
>
>
>

I'm attempting to have properties put into each worksheet, so as when I call
on which ever worksheet, I can get the proper value or set of values from
the code. Also, why the prequalified object, that's to avoid ambiguity
issues, as I will not introduce ambiguity into my code.

Based on what you are saying, I will have to emulate the worksheets.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000
"JLGWhiz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:546FBE68-A7A4-46B3-A27A-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Since you are calling a public Sub, the l_wsh is inappropriate. The
> Public
> Sub should be in a public module, not a sheet module. If the procedure
> pcdInitializeWorksheet is in the public module, the drop the l_wsh from
> the
> call and it should respond.
>
> "Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." wrote:
>
>> 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 signature:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>

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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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 signature:
>
> 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
>

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
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> 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 signature:
>>
>> 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
>>
>
>

> Why is that?

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

Regards,
Peter T

"Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> 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 signature:
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

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
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Why is that?
>
> Try it, I'm sure you will then work out why.
>
> Regards,
> Peter T
>
> "Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> 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
>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> 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 signature:
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Why is that?
>>
>> Try it, I'm sure you will then work out why.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter T
>>
>> "Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> 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
>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> 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 signature:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

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
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> 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
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Why is that?
>>>
>>> Try it, I'm sure you will then work out why.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Peter T
>>>
>>> "Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> 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
>>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> 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 signature:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> 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
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> Why is that?
>>>>
>>>> Try it, I'm sure you will then work out why.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Peter T
>>>>
>>>> "Ronald R. Dodge, Jr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> 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
>>>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> 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." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>>> 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 signature:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>