Do not take this class under any circumstances. Every aspect of this class is unfair. The workload is condensed so that most of the work is in the last two weeks of the class and finals week, resulting in all of your time being allocated towards this class. The assignments for those last two weeks and the final have extremely unfair grading practices that result in receiving a failing grade if your submission is not perfect. Be prepared to appeal your grade. My original grade for this class was a C and the only reason my grade is now a B- is due to appealing my grade with Dean Wesel.
Overall Professor Srivastava is the ideal demonstration of an incompetent Professor as he refuses to recognize the deficiencies in his course and address them when they are presented to him on a silver platter. As a result he should not be permitted to teach this course again. Perhaps that will happen if ZERO people enroll the next time he is assigned to teach this course.

Overall, Professor Srivastava is a great lecturer who truly cares our learning.

The course itself is very interesting and the content is much different than anything I have seen in academic setting. With that being said though it is very challenging and you can plan having multiple long nights with this one. Mani is a very nice guy, I went to office hours when I was struggling and he was glad to help out. My only complaints would be that I got lost in lecture frequently, and that the professor is not loud enough, but this was likely only because he taught in a huge lecture hall with few students. He can also get tracked into talking while looking down at his computer and writing annotations to the slides in which case you can't hear him much at all.

All in all, the content is pretty enjoyable as far as technology goes, but the workload is going to be tough. I know some other people who have taken this class with a different professor and never had the same issue. Credit to Mani, though, he does do a ton to make sure students can get help if they need it and offers resources through the internet which are extremely valuable. Also seriously recommend getting the book, many of the examples in the slides come right from there.

I took M16 with him. The biggest thing I would say is get ready to put in work. For a this rivals as one of the most time intensive lower div classes I have taken, I would even compare it with the workload from EE 110 and classes like that.

I very much enjoyed the class, but this is because I liked the material. He does cover a lot of material so if you want to learn take him. If your looking for a easy class I would avoid it.

He's not a bad guy, but the way he teaches this class is radically different from other professors' ways of doing so. There is a great amount of content to learn in this class in comparison to other M16 classes, and he is generally difficult to approach.

The content isn't difficult, but there is just too much to learn at one time. The homeworks were all notoriously difficult and extremely time-consuming, and the Logisim projects he gave us were extremely tough. I remember him extending the deadline for one project for another weekend and people still not being able to understand and do it.

That being said, you will gain a lot of insight if you happen to survive and pass this class, but I would not recommend you take it under a busy schedule. Overall, the absolute hardest class and professor I have ever taken in my years at UCLA.

Wait for a different professor to take this class. I understood the material very well, and I did above average on both of the midterms and the final design project, but I still ended with a B because of the design assignments. The first seven weeks of the class were very light, but the professor assigned a quarter's worth of work in the last three weeks, including multiple design assignments (which none of the other professors for this class do). His instructions were so unclear that the median on the last design assignment was a zero, and this counted for a substantial amount of our grade. Even the TA's didn't understand the professors instructions on these assignments.

The professor thinks he is reasonable, but he is the least understanding professor I've ever had, and it is very clear he doesn't care about his students in the slightest. He took a subject that I was very interested in and made it boring. The only good thing about this class was that I liked the material.

He is very hard teacher. Even though his lectures are amazing, really benefical, he doesnt ask anything from the lectures.EEM16 is supposed to be an introductory course but he made it the worst class for me at UCLA.
No doubt he is intelligent and knows a lot, but sorry to say folks, he lacks teaching skills. His tests are so hard , you can barely finish it ..forget about even knowing the questions you expect. The tests are not less thicker than a full fledged book. Questions asked are from another planet, i learnt nothing from this class.
Only depression throughout the quarter. Plus he doesnt help at all. If you go to his office hours and ask him question, he wont help much. Highly not recommended. if you are willing to sacrifice your grade, than take him.

One of the most difficult, badly designed and worse courses at UCLA EE for undergraduates to take. Take this class only if you have no life and plan to do nothing for 3 months other than to work on badly designed labs, code in Python and listen to bland lectures which have nothing to do with the course whatsoever. Be prepared to spend the nights in the lab while working like a slave to finish an impossible to finish project in a course of 2 weeks. The course description says that the class is held on two days, but in actuality you will be in the classroom four days out of seven. After taking this class I realized that I learned absolutely nothing about robotics. Totally worthless experience. The TA was nice though and genuinely wanted to help.

Professor Mani is a very good professor, but he's VERY HARD in my opinion. He gave homework that took a long time to complete and requires you to understand the class material very well. I spent a few days on the homeworks but his projects were fairly easy. The only caveat to his projects is that if you get one test case wrong, you lose 25% of your project points. So if you get 4 wrong, you get 0 in your projects. Harsh, but I can see why it's necessary.

The mid term was fair, it tested on concepts. One of the questions with parts (a,b,c, ... etc) had points taken off if you answered it wrong/didn't attempt it.

The final exam was had the same format. If you get something wrong or didn't attempt a question, your points are deducted, if you got it right, you'd get points. But the final asked questions that were far more conceptual and required a deeper understanding of the material.

He normalizes everything and is super transparent about your grade. In other words, you can track your grade in the course (median = 80%, highest = 100%). Say you fall somewhere in the 80's range, you know you're going to get some form of B. If you're in the 70's range, you know you're going to get some form of C. IF you're in the 50-60's range, you know you're in trouble cause you might fail. Yes, failing in this course is REAL. Don't fall behind!

These were the final grades given:
A's: 15
B's: 22
C's: 10
D's: 3
F's: 6

If you plan to take him, be ready to work hard! It's definitely not easy, and some people are really good at it. In the end it pays off! You'll understand logic gates more than anyone else. It's worth all the work!

He is very clear. The material is hard though. That's just how it is. Do problems from the book. Definitely harder than 101B (in terms of the math). Conceptually difficult to understand.