You have a good point!
I tried to keep my need simple.
The worksheets were prepared by new users who chose to enter text under
a Column heading, in many rows vs. just one cell using Alt-Enter for
paragraphing in the cell.
So, before I delete the extra cell-rows, I must concatenate the
multiple-cell information into the cell where there is information in
Column "A".
If this can be done by going in reverse fine! I just did not think of
it.
Thanks
Maistrye wrote:
> Dennis Wrote:
> > Using 2003
> >
> >
> > Assume that Column A has a UsedRange(Rows) of 1000 cells.
> >
> > Of those cells, only 22 are data-filled.
> >
> > What is the best way in VBA to compute the Address and Row Number of
> > the first cell in "A" that has a value? (Assume "A7")
> >
> > What is the best way in VBA to compute the Address and Row Number of
> > the Second cell in "A" that has a value? (Assume "A40")
> >
> > What is the best way in VBA to compute the Address and Row Number of
> > the (Other cells in "A" that have values? etc.
> >
> >
> > Once I have the above then I know that Cell A8 through Cell A39 are
> > blank which rows I would like to delete.
> >
> > The challenge is there are about 21 other blank-cell ranges in the
> > UsedRange.
> >
> > I would like a VBA Loop to delete each of the blank ranges:
> > The Loop needs to know the Address to start and the number of rows
> > to delete;
> > Which means I also need to reset the loop's counter variable with
> > the number of rows [like A39 - A7 +1 equals 34] each time a group of
> > rows are deleted.
> >
> > What is the smartest way to:
> > 1) start the loop just after value 1 in Column A and
> > 2) "process" through to Value 2 in Column A Then
> > 3) reset the Loop Variables so that the loop starts at Value 2 in
> > Column A and proceeds to Value 3 in Column A, etc, etc?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Dennis
>
> I may be looking at this wrong, but wouldn't it be better to loop
> starting at the 1000th row and stepping back through to row 1? Then,
> just delete each row that doesn't have a value in column A and proceed
> to the next row. If you go from 1 to 1000, it seems to me there are
> more complications, which is why it seems that going backwards would be
> better.
>
> Scott
>
>
> --
> Maistrye
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Maistrye's Profile: http://www.excelforum.com/member.php...o&userid=36078
> View this thread: http://www.excelforum.com/showthread...hreadid=563416