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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	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: 1994-10-16 22:26:00 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!blanket.mitre.org!linus.mitre.org!linus!mbunix!eachus
From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Child packages [nn,pedo,incest,cons]
Date: 14 Oct 94 17:13:02
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
Message-ID: <EACHUS.94Oct14171302@spectre.mitre.org>
References: <1994Oct4.090807@di.epfl.ch> <37kanl$jfd@u.cc.utah.edu>
	<1994Oct14.094121@di.epfl.ch> <1994Oct14.121611.22416@sei.cmu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spectre.mitre.org
In-reply-to: firth@sei.cmu.edu's message of Fri, 14 Oct 1994 12:16:11 EDT
Date: 1994-10-14T17:13:02+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


     A couple of years ago the issue of permitting or forbidding
illegitimate children was strongly debated (at the Portsmouth
meeting). It was a close call, and I think the sentiment was in favor
of forbidding.

     However, there were several other needed changes in the
visibility model involving child units (involving who could see whose
private parts).  Tucker's (elegent) solutions to those forced the
morality (and legality) of illegitimate children to become an
environmental issue, while mitigating the harm that they can do.

     As an early opponent of illegitimate children, I support the
current position.  Yes, you can shoot yourself in the foot by creating
an illegitimate child, but it is hard to shoot others feet as well.


--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...