Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!ALFA.berkeley.edu!bks
From: bks@ALFA.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Engineers are just as much in the dark as programmers.
Message-ID: <25047@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 30 May 89 19:02:24 GMT
References: <24857@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <33816@regenmeister.uucp>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: bks@ALFA.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 38

In article <33816@regenmeister.uucp> chrisp@regenmeister.uucp (Chris Prael) writes:
>From article <24857@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, by bks@ALFA.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman):
>> Come off it you guys.  "Real" engineers screw up just like we programmers.
>>	...
>> The big difference, as far as I can tell, is that the educational and
>> certification systems for older engineering disciplines keep out more
>>      ...
>Which simply shows that you, like many in our field, are seriously 
>under-informed about how real engineers function.

Well, this IS the crux of my argument.  Please enlighten us.  What is
it about the day to day functioning of "real" engineers that is
so different from the way "real" programmers function. 

>> I know what a programmer is.  I almost understand what software-engineering
>> is.
>Until you know what software-engineering is, you will not know
>what (or who) a competent programmer is.

Was that necessary?  I'm a member of ACM, IEEE Computer Society and
I read IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.  I have completed
projects on time, to spec and under budget.  However, almost every month
in one form or another, I read or hear some "real" engineer complaining
about programmers.  I'm still waiting to hear a description of what engineering
connotes that is missing from software development.  This does NOT
mean that I reject the kind of discipline, redundancy and design that I
THINK is implied when the phrase "software engineering" is used.  Nor do
I wish to be associated with amateurs any more than engineers want
to be associated with tinkerers (no offense intended to this honorable group).

>> ... 
>Interesting choice.  How is it that you find Political Science
>more valid than Economics?

It might be because the P.I. for our group is a Political Scientist,
but I'm far too objective to let something like that influence me.

	Brad Sherman (bks@ALFA.Berkeley.Edu)