I found some suggestions in other threads. One person suggested
putting word into Normal view, and turning off auto-pagination. That
does seem to help. It lets the macro run faster.
Another person reccommended using Range instead of things like
Select.TypeText. I'm pretty sure that Selection.Typetext is
ascynchronous. Can anyone verify that Range commands are synchronous
(won't return until the change is made)?
> I found some suggestions in other threads. One person suggested
> putting word into Normal view, and turning off auto-pagination. That
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> ascynchronous. Can anyone verify that Range commands are synchronous
> (won't return until the change is made)?
It's not that Range commands are synchronous, but they're orders of
magnitude faster than Selection.TypeText, especially if screen redrawing
hasn't been turned off. Assigning
myRange.Text = someStringValue
is nearly instantaneous, even if the string is very long.

Signature
Regards,
Jay Freedman
Microsoft Word MVP FAQ: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.
jamie.fallon@gmail.com - 02 Jul 2007 21:48 GMT
> jamie.fal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I found some suggestions in other threads. One person suggested
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
> all may benefit.
Gotcha. Thank you. Am I likely to be ok with Selection.TypeText if I
require background repagination to be turned off? In the future I'll
avoid using Selection.TypeText in a loop.
-Jamie
Klaus Linke - 03 Jul 2007 00:00 GMT
> Am I likely to be ok with Selection.TypeText if I
> require background repagination to be turned off?
Hi Jamie,
Another problem with .TypeText is that it's limited to 64kB (about 32000
characters).
If your strings might be longer, you'd need to replace it with
Selection.InsertAfter -- followed by Selection.Collapse(wdCollapseEnd) if
necessary.
Regards,
Klaus