Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Edgar T. Irons

dblp:82/3983 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1967
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Operating systems · 100%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Distributed systems · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Operating systems › resource management › process management › multiprogramming
time-sharing systems
0.011967
A philosophy for computer sharing · SOSP 1967
Distributed systems
resource sharing
0.011967
A philosophy for computer sharing · SOSP 1967
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1967 A philosophy for computer sharing
abstract
The remarks which follow concern four design objectives for a shared computer system, and their relation to the selection of computing equipment and the design and programming of a time-sharing program at IDA-CRD during the last year. The principle objective was to bring as much computing power to our users as possible, consistent with budgetary bounds, and to provide as intimate a connection to the computer for each user as possible. A second objective was to provide a computing environment which allows each user the maximum freedom and control over the machine possible within balancing of our third objective, namely, maximum reliability of the system. Our fourth objective was one which we choose for any program of a lasting nature; that the programs be as simple as possible to still achieve their purpose. Adhering to this maxim usually, although not always, reduces the time involved in realizing the programs; and in addition, holds promise for increasing their reliability and in any event reduces maintenance problems if only by reducing the possible number of wrong symbols.
Edgar T. Irons
SOSP1