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, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a8985ede8fe3d111 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-19 11:06:06 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com!ncohen From: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Child packages Date: 19 Oct 1994 16:24:38 GMT Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Distribution: world Message-ID: <383h86$12ip@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> References: <1994Oct4.090807@di.epfl.ch> <37kanl$jfd@u.cc.utah.edu> <1994Oct18.103131@di.epfl.ch> <3816h5$n3g@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> Reply-To: ncohen@watson.ibm.com NNTP-Posting-Host: rios8.watson.ibm.com Date: 1994-10-19T16:24:38+00:00 List-Id: In article , eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes: |> If 9X were only used for new projects, the simple |> solution would be to outlaw state in the private part as well. As it |> is, the solution is to strongly restrict children of such packages. No, as the other article I just posted illustrated, a child can be used to violate the representation variants maintained for ADTs even by stateless packages. The only solution is to treat the writing of a child for a package as tantamount to modifying the text the parent, and to impose the same access controls. -- Norman H. Cohen ncohen@watson.ibm.com