>Is there a standard term in computing circles that mean the opposite of
>orphaned?
No: there are many "opposite[s] of orphaned" so you have to be more
specific about what you mean. In the specific case of a strict tree
structure, "parented" would be correct, as in "When a process is
orphaned, it will be automatically reparented to 'init' (process 1)."
But in some cases the antonym may be "unorphaned", if the meaning of
"orphan" is sufficiently complicated or not directly related to a tree
structure. For example, IEEE Std. 1003.1-2001 defines "orphaned
process group" as:
A process group in which the parent of every member is either
itself a member of the group or is not a member of the group's
session.
"Parented" cannot be used here because process groups do not have a
tree structure and thus do not have parents, so one would either say
"unorphaned" or (depending on context) spell out a more specific
condition.
-GAWollman

Signature
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
tinwhistler - 06 Jan 2007 19:51 GMT
[snip]
> "Parented" cannot be used here because process groups do not have a
> tree structure and thus do not have parents, so one would either say
[snip]
The OED has a couple of citations, both 19th century, for "filiated,
a." One of them is Thomas Jefferson speaking of the US as a "filiated
society," ie, parented by another society. I have no particular
affinity for this adjective, however.
Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego
Roland Hutchinson - 07 Jan 2007 00:50 GMT
>>Is there a standard term in computing circles that mean the opposite of
>>orphaned?
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> "unorphaned" or (depending on context) spell out a more specific
> condition.
In the case of "orphaned" software products, the opposite is "supported".

Signature
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
Frances Kemmish (or somebody else of the same name) wrote thusly in message
<50a2abF1fc1r5U1@mid.individual.net>:
> My husband just asked me what word means the opposite of "orphaned"
> (he's not talking children - he is writing computer code).
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Fran
In computer jargon usage, for something to have become "orphaned" generally
implies that something has gone wrong somewhere creating an anomaly, e.g.
there's an order from a non-existent customer and/or calling up
non-existent items. (Both scenarios are familiar from my own database
work!) The general idea is of a reference field which either hasn't been
filled in, or points to something that doesn't exist or has been deleted,
hence the figurative use of "orphaned". What is the opposite of anomaly?
I would say there isn't really an opposite, though if pressed for a word or
phrase I would offer "valid" or "correctly linked".

Signature
Terms and conditions apply. Batteries not included. Subject to status.
Contains moderate language. Always read the label. Keep out of children.
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
> My husband just asked me what word means the opposite of "orphaned"
> (he's not talking children - he is writing computer code).
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Is there a standard term in computing circles that mean the opposite of
> orphaned?
Thanks to everyone who made suggestions: the responses have allowed him
to clarify his thought processes somewhat. He has decided that
"orphaned" may give the wrong impression, and will probably use
"detached" and "attached" instead.
Fran