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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,87e8cfe2f62264db X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-02-09 01:05:08 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!aix11.hrz.uni-oldenburg.de!uniol!zib-berlin.de!Germany.EU.net!wizard.pn.com!satisfied.elf.com!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!news.usafa.af.mil!kirk!cwarack From: cwarack@kirk.usafa.af.mil (Chris Warack ) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Run-time for embedded systems Date: 8 Feb 1995 22:51:20 GMT Organization: USAF Academy, CO Sender: cwarack@kirk (Chris Warack ) Distribution: world Message-ID: <3hbht8$t1j@usafa2.usafa.af.mil> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: kirk.usafa.af.mil Date: 1995-02-08T22:51:20+00:00 List-Id: In article , CONDIC@PSAVAX.PWFL.COM writes: |> From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93 |> Subject: Re: Ada Run-time for embedded systems |> Original_To: PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB" |> Original_cc: CONDIC |> |> |> |> "Theodore E. Dennison" Writes: |> > |> >l107353@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com (Garlington KE) wrote: |> >> |> >> Actually, there's a lot of COTS being used in embedded systems these days; |> >> it's just that "embedded" means more than those weaselly little processors |> >> used in avionics like ICNIA (or like I still use today :). For example, |> >> C3I workstations are often called "embedded" systems since they are part of |> >> a larger system. Many of these environments use extensive COTS databases, |> >> display managers, etc. |> >> |> >Gimme a break! |> > |> >Show me someone who refers to a workstation setup as an "embedded |> >system" and I'll show you someone who is trying to pad his resume'. |> > |> I have to agree. While one might easily call a workstation based |> application "realtime" it's hard to imagine it as being |> "embedded". If you define "embedded" losely enough, you could |> call a payroll application on an IBM mainframe a "realtime", |> "embedded" system. After all, it's "embedded" in a factory system |> which semi-automatically takes raw materials in at one end of the |> building and squirts out widgets from the other end. And it |> happens in "realtime" because paydays happen on the 1st and 15th. |> And they're "hard" deadlines in that missing them could result in |> a riot which would destroy the widget producing platform... That's true, but embedded isn't defined that loosely. According to DoD, that's a data processing system. An embedded system is a critical part of a weapon system (at least from the DoD perspective). For example: You have several large satellite tracking antennas attached to a room full of receivers, demuxes, and decommutators, attached to a network of work stations (with or without keyboards and monitors) attached to a communications processor attached to a dedicated network. Hanging off the work stations is another network of user stations based on a work station with two or three monitors, keyboard, keypad, and pointing device. The sole purpose of all of this stuff is to control some satellites and process the data they collect. That, is an embedded system... albeit a very big one. The only reason the main processing work stations have keyboards and monitors is diagnostics, on-machine control, and maintenance. It's easier that way. The reason to use work stations is obvious ----- cost. |> I don't know how y'all would like to define what an "embedded" |> system is, but I'd say that if it has a screen, QWERTY keyboard |> and a mouse, we're _probably_ not talking about one. But you might be... :-) Also think Air Traffic Control, submarines, and ships as well as satellite ground stations. I doubt you can argue for a clear, black and white distinction between embedded and non-embedded. In USAF, anyways, it seems pretty easy. If it's general purpose or data processing (does IM or DP stuff), then its not embedded. In the rest of the world, I don't think it'd be that easy. -- Christopher A. Warack, Capt, USAF Computer Science Department, US Air Force Academy cwarack@kirk.usafa.af.mil (719) 472-2401