>>>>> "Sy" == Sy Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sy> I am curious to know if Alstair's teachers are experienced
Sy> designers of "hard real-time" systems or have been brought up
Sy> under time-shared mainframes with multi-tasking operating
Sy> systems. The use of the word scheduling implied using a computer
Sy> in a time-shared manner. Did they explain why a control system
Sy> need to assume a time shared computer?
I don't know where you got that impression. The word "scheduler" is
not at all limited in the way you suggest.
ANY system that has more than one thread (task, process, pick your
favorite name) has a scheduler. It may not be called by that name,
and it may not look like much. For example, in classic Forth
(explicit release of control, non-preemptive, single priority)
systems, the scheduler is pretty small and doesn't necessarily show up
as a block of code you can easily point to. But, functionally, it is
there.
Similarly, real time systems have schedulers. Some are simple, others
not so. Timesharing systems also have schedulers (typically rather
primitive ones). Clearly, since the system requirements are
different, real time systems have schedulers with different properties
than timesharing systems.
paul
--- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/
