FOM: priority arguments in applied recursion theory

[Steve Stevenson]

 > Background of my question:
 > 
 >   Suppose I make myself a ``to do'' list, e.g., a list of tasks that I
 >   want/need to finish this summer, before the start of the next
 >   academic year.  It may include tasks such as: (1) finish writing my
 >   CTA paper, (2) answer numerous private e-mails from Soare, (3) write
 >   a referee report, (4) get a haircut, etc etc.  And suppose I order
 >   these tasks in various ways, e.g. in terms of importance, amount of
 >   time needed to complete, etc., and systematically arrange them in
 >   such a way that I will be able to accomplish them in a desirable or
 >   efficient manner, barring unforeseen circumstances.

>From a strictly computer science standpoint, you are defining a series
of "scheduling relations" that are to have partial orders imposed ont
them (or maybe directed acyclic graphs). Scheduling in operating
systems is done pretty much the way you outlined here. Same trick is
pulled in compilers and parallel processing. So I would guess that
this is what Steve Kurtz may be thinking about.

But what is the non-CS equivalent "story?" Do you (Steve Simpson) call 
this a priority method?

Best regards,

steve
-----
Steve (really "D. E.") Stevenson           Assoc Prof
Department of Computer Science, Clemson,   (864)656-5880.mabell
Support V&V mailing list: ivandv at cs.clemson.edu