From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!sei.cmu.edu!jbg
From: jbg@sei.cmu.edu (John Goodenough)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: nested accepts ?
Message-ID: <1307@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 11-May-87 11:31:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: aw.1307
Posted: Mon May 11 11:31:47 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 13-May-87 04:07:12 EDT
References: <12301096303.22.BRYAN@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: netnews@sei.cmu.edu
Reply-To: Goodenough@sei.cmu.edu
Distribution: world
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, SEI, Pgh, Pa
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In response to a question during the design phase objecting to the rule
forbidding nested accepts for the same entry, the design team replied.  "[This
restriction is] motivated by difficulties with the visibility rules ..."
(This quote is from the response to comment #4490 on the draft RM Chapters.)
(At one point, the design team wanted to forbid nested accepts entirely, but
it was persuaded to allow them insofar as possible.)

John Goodenough
Goodenough@sei.cmu.edu