Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?
From: Ed Beroset (beroset_at_mindspring.com)
Date: 02/12/05
- Next message: Ulf Samuelsson: "Re: PS/2 to Serial\SPI converter?"
- Previous message: CBFalconer: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- In reply to: Terje Mathisen: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- Next in thread: Jan Vorbrüggen: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:58:18 GMT
Terje Mathisen wrote:
> Ed Beroset wrote:
>
>> Terje Mathisen wrote:
>>
>>> Ed Beroset wrote:
>>>
>>> With my old telecomms classes 25+ years behind me, I still remember
>>> enough to say that this looks like a classic queueing theory
>>> question. Erlang to the resque. (But only if the same simplifications
>>> hold true!)
>>
>>
>>
>> That's the way I'd approach it.
>>
>>> Anyway, this is most definitely an engineering problem (at least at
>>> my alma mater), not CS.
>>
>>
>>
>> The problem was deliberately phrased as an engineering problem. But
>> of course in order to solve it, it's useful to know a little about
>> queueing theory which is certainly in the domain of computer science.
>
>
> Huh?
>
> AS I wrote above, this class (Erlang/Queuing theory) was taught only in
> the EE department, not CS. :-(
A local university here teaches the same course under two different
numbers in the catalog. The only difference is that one is nominally in
the CS department and the other in the EE department. At least one of
the books I've got on the subject was written by a university professor
who works in the EE department. It's still computer science. The
*application* of it is engineering.
>> That was my point. It's just the same as using calculus in the
>> service of solving engineering problems. Calculus was invented by
>> scientists, not engineers, but it happens to be extremely useful in
>> engineering.
>
> Most theoretical breakthroughs were made by scientists, that doesn't
> mean engineers won't use the results.
Of course. We agree on that, and naturally engineers invent things all
the time that are of use to scientists.
>> Computer science is also useful in engineering, and in my experience,
>> those who have studied computer science have been useful and
>> productive members of programming teams I've worked with.
>
> I never stated that they weren't useful/productive, only that in my
> personal experience the very best all happened to be engineers, not CS
> graduates.
I wasn't disputing your observation. I was just adding to it by noting,
from my experience, what CS graduates tend to do better. Others seemed
to be implying that CS graduates are incapable of working usefully on
embedded systems, hence my comment here.
> Terje
> PS. This _might_ be a sore spot for me, since I declined an offer to
> change from EE to CS for my major. :-)
Evidently it's a sore spot for a lot of people! I expect that will fade
over time, in the same way that few people working in electrical
engineering had EE degrees in the 1950's (because few universities had
EE degree programs then). I've hired people with no degree and people
with PhDs in unrelated fields; what matters ultimately was whether they
could do the job.
Adm. Grace Hopper had a PhD in mathematics.
Could she program? ;-)
Ed
- Next message: Ulf Samuelsson: "Re: PS/2 to Serial\SPI converter?"
- Previous message: CBFalconer: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- In reply to: Terje Mathisen: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- Next in thread: Jan Vorbrüggen: "Re: Self restarting property of RTOS-How it works?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
