Hi, As far as I remember so far we've seen that some numbers were put in SET OF BYTE, but weren't found in by IN operator (which was acknowleged as a bug for Alpha/64bit platform - I don't know whether the test failed on any other architecture?). This is a test which stresses other issue: I've found some numbers IN SET which were NOT added to it! (Only on Alpha/64bit, on 32bit Solaris all tests pass with OK!). Also initialization fails, but IMHO all this bugs have something in common; so I went forth with these examples only in hope that they will help nail the bug. mirsad The test is (all four new tests are in attachment for your convenience): --mirsad05.pas------------------------------------------------------------ PROGRAM setranges5(output); { Written by: Mirsad Todorovac Nov 2001; copying by GPL. ------------------------------------------------------------ Stresses setrange construction and adding; checks if there's more in SET than we've put in. lasts few seconds where I've tested it.} CONST maxN = 255; VAR seta, setb, setc: SET OF 0..maxN; i, j, len, start, endr: Cardinal; failed: Boolean = false; BEGIN FOR i:= 0 TO maxN DO IF ((i IN seta) OR (i IN setb) OR (i IN setc)) THEN writeln('Failed: SET not initialized empty!'); FOR len:= 1 TO maxN+1 DO BEGIN FOR start:= 0 TO maxN-len+1 DO BEGIN endr := start+len-1; {writeln('constr. range = ', start, ',', endr);} setb := seta + [start .. endr]; FOR i:= 0 TO maxN DO BEGIN IF (((i < start) AND (i IN setb)) OR ((i > endr) AND (i IN setb))) THEN IF (NOT failed) THEN BEGIN writeln('Failed: ', i,' outside range found IN SET! ', '[',start, '..', endr,']'); {It's sufficient for one example to fail to find a bug!} failed := True; END END END END; IF (NOT failed) THEN writeln('OK'); END. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -- This message has been made up using recycled ideas and language constructs. No plant or animal has been injured in process of making this message.