Here's a slight intersection oddity: 1. Draw an ellipse 2. Draw a second ellipse entirely inside the first. 3. Join the two shapes. 4. Draw a box across both ellipses, producing a shape a bit like a London Underground roundel. 5. Join the shapes. 6. Draw a large box on top of the roundel, covering it entirely. 7. Join the shapes again. 8. Clone. 9. Intersect with top. 10. Break shapes. 11. Delete the remants of the intersected boxes, leaving two curved shapes, one vaguely resembling a letter 'c' or 'u' and the other resembling its mirror image. A.) Where the box cut the ellipses there are several control points slightly to one side of where the 'cuts' were made. Now, these are straight even though the rest of the curve is a proper curve. Why is this? Furthermore - and this is the annoying bit - converting the unwanted straight line sections back to curves is fiddly because there are several control points exactly overlapping. Some visual feedback when there are multiple overlapping control points would be very useful, and a way to step through them one at a time without disturbing them would also be welcome. B.) Experimentation with selecting the two surviving shapes shows that somehow ArtWorks still seems to retain a memory of the shapes' original 'bounding box'. I can drag a selection box over one shape and yet the other shape is the one selected. Confusing. The bounding area seems to be that of the large box drawn in stage 6, so the behaviour is more apparent if you make this box much larger than necessary. The spurious bounding box seems to disappear if you move the shape, but I'm not entirely sure I have fully understood ArtWorks' behaviour here. If one can have excessively large bounding boxes, as here, I would like some way to be able to see where they are - or else I would assume this behaviour needs to be treated as a bug and corrected. C.) While the procedure of drawing boxes and intersecting does allows one to split and join shapes however one pleases, it does introduce several extra manipulation stages. Would it be easy to add 'union' and 'difference' facilities that automate the procedures given in the Intersect5 and Intersect6 tutorials? I would like be able to construct shapes by starting with a series of unions, then difference bits away, then add on some more using union, then subtract some more, and so on. While logically equivalent, using a series of Intersects doesn't come nearly as easily to me. Simon Smith -- Have you heard of the International Obfuscated Perl Code Competition? Each contestant is shown ten Perl programs - five that have been written normally and five that have been deliberately obfuscated. In order to win, you just have to decide which is which.