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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a1eff3a9508d6cba X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: munck@Mill-Creek-Systems.com (Robert Munck) Subject: Re: Space Station S/W in Ada -- No Tasking? Date: 1998/05/05 Message-ID: <354f8259.1275955@news.mindspring.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 350560637 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <354dadfd.2883074@news.mindspring.com> X-Server-Date: 5 May 1998 21:28:27 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Mill Creek Systems LC Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: munck@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-05-05T21:28:27+00:00 List-Id: On Tue, 5 May 1998 15:21:41 GMT, rracine@draper.com (Roger Racine) wrote: > ... there is tasking being used for the ISS. I was one >of the people who convinced the Boeing management to allow it You did good. Robert Dewar's experience may be different, but in 32-odd years in the business and a great deal of DoD, NASA, and ESA involvement, I've never seen a large cyclic-executive- architecture system that was in any way successful. The trouble is that cyclic-exec projects are easier for bad managers to manage. They don't have to understand tough concepts like deadlock, critical sections, rate monotonic scheduling, etc. Boeing management had to be convinced? I hesitate to ask, but how is the 777 avionics s/w structured? Bob Munck Mill Creek Systems LC