Fellow ChucKists, consider; ---------------------------- int foo @=> int bar; //yields semi-random high number <<<bar>>>; ----------------------- and; ----------------------- 1 => int foo @=> int bar; //yields "1" <<<bar>>>; 2 => foo; //yields "1" <<<bar>>>; ------------------------------ Integers seem to be in some sort of state of doubt between being assignable and not being assignable (maybe also in doubt about being a object? the poor things!). This becomes somewhat important if bar is a member of a class that -for it's member functions- would benefit from knowing what happens around it. I can still turn both foo and bar into length 1 arrays or keep passing foo as a argument to such functions but that's not as pretty. Yours, Kas. PS for those who hadn't seen this yet; length 1 arrays to trick integers into becoming full objects was cooked up by Frostburn here; http://electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23628 Maybe inspired by this strategy to turn functions into objects (in a roundabout way); http://electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23546 Tricky but useful.