_FILEEXISTS isn't supposed to accept wildcards. Its purpose is to check if a specific file exists. if you need to check if a series of files exists then you will either need to make a loop that iterates through the total possible instances of a specific file, say if TRASH0000.TXT to TRASH9999.TXT was the naming convention. Otherwise you will need to probably look into a SHELL style command or some form of API call.

Last week, he in Melbourne Australia, our fuel cost was $2.20 per Litre - 4.8 litres per gallon - that's roughly AU$10.56 per gallon (Almost US$7.90)

FYI 3.8l per gal.
but still a hell-of-a-lot of money.

but it's use would be cumbersome

Hence why QB64 would not have one. BASIC is not meant to be cumbersome. Which of course may leave some wanting, but if they need

something like that they probably need to step away from BASIC languages.

But then it comes down to how much actual precision do you really need?

Its all relative, if thats not an over used phrase.

How much precision do you really need?

If your trying to pinpoint a single snow flake on the surface of Pluto then you probably need some pretty sharp precision.

If your trying to put a golf ball in a 55 gallon drum sitting next to you.. probably not.

They're not going to waste a lot of time on something like this unless your going into a field that requires accuracy on the sub-atomic scale.

(why am I double spacing all my posts?)

There is no single right answer.

You'll have to find the way that best works with what your trying to accomplish.

divide as you have shown there, or

z! = INT(I!*1000)\1000  say if you wanted 3 points of precision.

Use that string math thingy thats floating around here somewhere.

Or just work something out that gives you the results that you can work with.

Just the nature of the floating point beast.

Hate to be a naysayer BUT, It seems to be way too invasive, there are a multitude of buttons associated with it that constantly cause popups if accidentally pressed. Plus clicking too far to the left side trying to get to the beginning of a line.

Perhaps an option to completely disable it if you don't need it? That way it doesn't get in the way but, can still be turned back on when needed?

I don't really care one way or the other, works fine for me now. I just thought I see if Bplus was right about it being different in an earlier version or not. And he was.
AND it turns out Steve is right too! Ver .954(SDL) displays a -1.
Guessing, perhaps, when it switched over to GL it assigned the CONST differently and then an update sometime after 1.1\1.2 changed the way they are allocated.

I say leave them alone. CONSTs are fine just how they are.

Would have been nice if somebody would have pointed out what you did wrong, though you might of garnered it from the example replies.

This was your original issue;

SUB text (g, ttt, testing, t1, t2, t3)

If you wanted to pass a UDT you needed to use the AS statement just like in a DIM line

SUB text (g, ttt AS testing)
called with
text 1, ttt

in your original line, each of those variables being passed were passed as the SINGLE data type, by default since you did not specify.

That is why you were not seeing the results you expected.

Now you didn't receive any kind of error because you didn't write one bit of code wrong! Every thing you typed was valid code. Just not the code that would produce the results you wanted.  ttt.t1 is a valid variable even without UDT.

and GET #1, g, ttt
worked correctly too it loaded 4bytes (length of a SINGLE) into ttt, but instead of as a STRING it loaded it as a SINGLE(numeric) value. so no error

and of course PRINT ttt.t1 would have printed 0 as ttt.t1 was a SINGLE value that had nothing assigned to it.(same with the other 2 print lines) so still no error

max = LOF(1) / LEN(ttt)
here LEN(ttt) would have been 4, again because ttt is a SINGLE value which is 4 bytes long. again no error on the compiler side.

Hopefully that explains what occurred, and you can avoid (or make) some problems in the future with this knowledge.