Informal Student Feedback 1997

• This approach to teaching with a much greater emphasis on a ``hands-on'' approach I found to be a lot more interesting and rewarding as I would actually see the theory learned in class being applied with is something no other subject offers. Definitively a much better approach at this higher level.
• I agree. Found L4 stuff + project very interesting, as we got to apply it, and it was current research. Other stuff was slightly boring. Slight crossover with other subjects (caching/TLBs, logical clocks). Overall, most interesting subject I've ever done.
• I found the hands-on approach very rewarding & motivating, but found the lecture material not always relevant to the project and therefore not as interesting.
• find /home/cs9242/public_html -t -d -exec 'chmod 755 {}'
  Cool subject, with better docs L4 would speak for itself making project nicer & freeing lectures for more cool topics: networked file systems, security etc. Make ASysT Lab 24hr (caffeine optional) & show more code in lectures.
• The L4 lecture notes should be merged with the L4 Reference Manual to make this volume more comprehensive. The DECstations are cool, but the monitors are blurry.
• I found it hard to get into the project, because of the lack of documentation. Partitioning the project into milestones helps to get along.
• I think the stuff covered in the lectures was sometimes apart from the project stuff, so that the project mainly ran independently. But in essence the ``hands-on'' approach is a very good one especially from the point of view that lectures like this not all the times just cover the theoretical stuff. However, more assistance during the milestones would be desirable.
• My main complaint is that the lab is not 24hrs available. (Or at least more machines.) And the painful experience of trying to find things from the L4 manual. A few more examples on L4 IPC would help a lot.
  I found that the project drew about 80% of my lab time each week. I had to sacrifice other subjects for it.
• More UNIX boxes, thanks :)
• Just wondering what kind of questions are going to be put for the exam????
• Put the lecture notes earlier in stead of 5 mins before lecture.
  Compiling too slow.
• All of the above + maybe a set ``text'' for reference or aid in the explanation of lecture notes.
• Give more tutorial.
• This subject is good!
• (Appendix to two above) a brief but detailed introduction before each milestone begins.
• Good for improving ability on C, completing knowledge on OS, but less tutorial
• A bit more time for completing assignments would be great
• More care when supplying files (i.e. Makefile errors)
• L4 manual needs to be filled out. Rather than just a collection of cut & pasted charts & tables, make a user manual
• Perhaps a little more of an idea of our milestone should look (we, i.e. my group, found our OS very different from others, when what the others did was simpler)
• Learnt a lot from doing the assignment - quite rewarding and satisfying (when it worked!)
• More reference materials elaborating lecture materials
• Milestones need to be more properly defined. Sometimes don't know what needs or needn't be done.
• Overall, an excellent subject with lots of interesting material. The issues and teething problems with the lab I am sure will be resolved. More detailed documentation for L4 would have assisted students to a significant extent.
• Learned a lot from COMP9242! It's a good subject
• Well prepared lecture material. Well designed project. Well maintained subject web page (FAQ helps a lot!) Assignments too hard compared with other subjects.

• The scarsity of L4 documentation was a known problem before. We now have an L4 User Manual which should help, and free up lecture time for other interesting stuff.
• This is not only a subject on how to write an OS on top of L4 (although that is probably the most fun part of it). It is meant to cover other advanced issues as well.
• This is an advanced subject, and I intentionally did not give to specific instructions on how to implement the milestones. The idea is that students should find out by themselves (e.g. study the literature) how to solve things. I was always happy to answer questions. Students learn much more that way.
  In the future we will require a minimum of 65 in OS to qualify for this subject to make sure that all students can cope.
• There is no suitable text book. I have supplied lots of literature references in the lecture notes (52 to be precise!)
• Late posted lecture notes are almost unavoidable for a new subject. Next time will be better.
• I am not aware of significant errors with Makefiles (or others). For some students it was high time they learned about make!
• The DECstations are old and slow; they were an interim solution and have been replaced in the meantime.
• Additional machines were put in, and, according to lab occupancies, that should really be sufficient. 24hr access is probably not feasible for a lab supporting only a single subject.