Tom Gardner wrote:> On 23/01/16 04:41, Les Cargill wrote: >> Tom Gardner wrote: >>> On 22/01/16 03:12, Les Cargill wrote: >> <snip> >>>> I just reject the general ... nihilism of most of the discourse on the >>>> subject. >>> >>> I reject panglossian optimism in favour of realistic objectives. >>> >> >> >> Let me rephrase, Tom. ( how critical is that comma? ) >> >> I think (still) after 30 years, that we still have to try. You won't >> get 'em all. Doesn't matter. >> >> The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate >> the size of The Beast Within. If you can hold all the interruptions >> off for... half a day, half a week, half a month, you can get well >> into the >> belly of it. >> >> it may matter; it may not matter. Here is to those times >> when it does. > > And there we are in violent agreement. > > In particular, we strongly believe the FSM specification > and implementation techniques are extremely valuable and > still offer the best mechanisms for producing reliable > hardware and software. (Of course other techniques are > beneficially applied in addition to those techniques) > > The only difference is the extent to which proof > is practical - but that doesn't *reduce* the benefits, > it merely puts an *upper limit* on them. > >YES! And I am here to testify that there's a ... happy valley where you get much gain for less than overwhelming effort in moving that way. The rest is an economic calculation, sadly. In a world where firmware is starting to heat up politically ( the VW mess is merely the opening salvo ) I think it behooves us to gird our loins a bit.> (I'm still mildly pleased that when I and another > schoolboy implemented programs for converting from > one 5-channel paper tape format to another, my program > worked first time and his never did. My program > was ~80 words (160 instructions) long and my first > assembler program, his was enormous. I later found > out I had reinvented a simple FSM with two states: > figure-shift and letter-shift.)There you go. Unfortunately, our education system doesn't seem to teach that as much as it does declarative logic; at least not in CS. -- Les Cargill
RTOS popularity
Started by ●December 26, 2015
Reply by ●January 24, 20162016-01-24
Reply by ●January 24, 20162016-01-24
On 24/01/16 17:03, Les Cargill wrote:> Tom Gardner wrote: >> On 23/01/16 04:41, Les Cargill wrote: >>> Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 22/01/16 03:12, Les Cargill wrote: >>> <snip> >>>>> I just reject the general ... nihilism of most of the discourse on the >>>>> subject. >>>> >>>> I reject panglossian optimism in favour of realistic objectives. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Let me rephrase, Tom. ( how critical is that comma? ) >>> >>> I think (still) after 30 years, that we still have to try. You won't >>> get 'em all. Doesn't matter. >>> >>> The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate >>> the size of The Beast Within. If you can hold all the interruptions >>> off for... half a day, half a week, half a month, you can get well >>> into the >>> belly of it. >>> >>> it may matter; it may not matter. Here is to those times >>> when it does. >> >> And there we are in violent agreement. >> >> In particular, we strongly believe the FSM specification >> and implementation techniques are extremely valuable and >> still offer the best mechanisms for producing reliable >> hardware and software. (Of course other techniques are >> beneficially applied in addition to those techniques) >> >> The only difference is the extent to which proof >> is practical - but that doesn't *reduce* the benefits, >> it merely puts an *upper limit* on them. >> >> > > YES! And I am here to testify that there's a ... happy > valley where you get much gain for less than overwhelming > effort in moving that way.Yup. And eventually I've occasionally been able to force other people to see that too.> The rest is an economic calculation, sadly. > > In a world where firmware is starting to heat up > politically ( the VW mess is merely the opening > salvo ) I think it behooves us to gird our loins a bit.I've been thinking that for decades :( It will only change when - manufacturers are forced to be responsible for the /consequences/ of misdesign - insurance premiums are dependent on properly designed equipment>> (I'm still mildly pleased that when I and another >> schoolboy implemented programs for converting from >> one 5-channel paper tape format to another, my program >> worked first time and his never did. My program >> was ~80 words (160 instructions) long and my first >> assembler program, his was enormous. I later found >> out I had reinvented a simple FSM with two states: >> figure-shift and letter-shift.) > > There you go. Unfortunately, our education system > doesn't seem to teach that as much as it does declarative > logic; at least not in CS.Oh, we weren't taught that! It was entirely extra-curricular. Mind you, everybody in my school was taught integration and differentiation of polynomials (except 1/x) for external exams (O-levels) at 15yo/year10 (yes, one year early). Nowadays maths teachers have difficulty believing that.
Reply by ●January 25, 20162016-01-25
Tom Gardner wrote:> On 24/01/16 17:03, Les Cargill wrote: >> Tom Gardner wrote: >>> On 23/01/16 04:41, Les Cargill wrote: >>>> Tom Gardner wrote: >>>>> On 22/01/16 03:12, Les Cargill wrote: >>>> <snip> >>>>>> I just reject the general ... nihilism of most of the discourse on >>>>>> the >>>>>> subject. >>>>> >>>>> I reject panglossian optimism in favour of realistic objectives. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Let me rephrase, Tom. ( how critical is that comma? ) >>>> >>>> I think (still) after 30 years, that we still have to try. You won't >>>> get 'em all. Doesn't matter. >>>> >>>> The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate >>>> the size of The Beast Within. If you can hold all the interruptions >>>> off for... half a day, half a week, half a month, you can get well >>>> into the >>>> belly of it. >>>> >>>> it may matter; it may not matter. Here is to those times >>>> when it does. >>> >>> And there we are in violent agreement. >>> >>> In particular, we strongly believe the FSM specification >>> and implementation techniques are extremely valuable and >>> still offer the best mechanisms for producing reliable >>> hardware and software. (Of course other techniques are >>> beneficially applied in addition to those techniques) >>> >>> The only difference is the extent to which proof >>> is practical - but that doesn't *reduce* the benefits, >>> it merely puts an *upper limit* on them. >>> >>> >> >> YES! And I am here to testify that there's a ... happy >> valley where you get much gain for less than overwhelming >> effort in moving that way. > > Yup. And eventually I've occasionally been able to > force other people to see that too. > > >> The rest is an economic calculation, sadly. >> >> In a world where firmware is starting to heat up >> politically ( the VW mess is merely the opening >> salvo ) I think it behooves us to gird our loins a bit. > > I've been thinking that for decades :( > > It will only change when > - manufacturers are forced to be responsible for > the /consequences/ of misdesignThat will probably be a "meteor event". IOW, no more manufacturers that are not also humongous insurance companies.> - insurance premiums are dependent on properly > designed equipment > >But the show business of certification probably means that's nearly impossible.>>> (I'm still mildly pleased that when I and another >>> schoolboy implemented programs for converting from >>> one 5-channel paper tape format to another, my program >>> worked first time and his never did. My program >>> was ~80 words (160 instructions) long and my first >>> assembler program, his was enormous. I later found >>> out I had reinvented a simple FSM with two states: >>> figure-shift and letter-shift.) >> >> There you go. Unfortunately, our education system >> doesn't seem to teach that as much as it does declarative >> logic; at least not in CS. > > Oh, we weren't taught that! It was entirely extra-curricular.I was - a little bit - but the dept. chairman was an applied mathematician with a background in EE.> Mind you, everybody in my school was taught integration > and differentiation of polynomials (except 1/x) for external > exams (O-levels) at 15yo/year10 (yes, one year early). > Nowadays maths teachers have difficulty believing that. >From what I've seen, even chemistry calculations at the undergrad level involve calculus ( which is much easier, IMO), so there's hope. -- Les Cargill
Reply by ●January 25, 20162016-01-25
Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> writes:> [...] > The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate > the size of The Beast Within.Did you mean underestimate? -- Randy Yates, DSP/Embedded Firmware Developer Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●January 25, 20162016-01-25
Randy Yates wrote:> Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> writes: >> [...] >> The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate >> the size of The Beast Within. > > Did you mean underestimate? >Nope. Generally things are simpler than we think they are. -- Les Cargill
Reply by ●January 26, 20162016-01-26
On 26.1.2016 г. 03:39, Les Cargill wrote:> Randy Yates wrote: >> Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> writes: >>> [...] >>> The critical thing is that we continually and habitually overestimate >>> the size of The Beast Within. >> >> Did you mean underestimate? >> > > > Nope. Generally things are simpler than we think they are. >I think I agree with that. Much of my time when programming goes into forecasting what will be useful in the future and how things are expected to evolve... Which is not a complex task, it is just one I try to solve based on insufficient knowledge at the moment. I must say I have done pretty well last 20+ years though, I have thrown away very little code and had to rewrite almost nothing (while almost everything I wrote is still heavily in use in the DPS environment). But looking back it looks just bulky, not too complex. Well, most of it. Dimiter ------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
