Is there a term for all tasks around programming?

Discussion in 'C++' started by DeMarcus, Sep 22, 2011.

  1. DeMarcus

    DeMarcus Guest

    Hi,

    We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    is there a common name for all the things around software development?

    With things around software development I mean for instance:

    * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.


    Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:

    Development Groundwork
    or
    Development Support


    Or is there already a common name?

    Thanks,
    Daniel
    DeMarcus, Sep 22, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Thursday, September 22, 2011 11:25:50 AM UTC+2, DeMarcus wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    > is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >
    > With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    > * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    > * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    > * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    > * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    > * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    >
    > Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    > any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >
    > Development Groundwork
    > or
    > Development Support
    >
    >
    > Or is there already a common name?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Daniel


    maybe toolchain?

    Cheers,
    Fulvio
    Fulvio Esposito, Sep 22, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DeMarcus

    Ian Collins Guest

    On 09/22/11 09:25 PM, DeMarcus wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    > is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >
    > With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    > * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    > * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    > * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    > * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    > * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    >
    > Is there a common name for all that kind of work above?


    Pain.

    With the exception of Unit testing which is development.

    --
    Ian Collins
    Ian Collins, Sep 22, 2011
    #3
  4. DeMarcus

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    On Thu, 2011-09-22, DeMarcus wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    > is there a common name for all the things around software development?


    Maybe ... software development?

    > With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    > * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    > * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    > * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    > * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    > * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    >
    > Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    > any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >
    > Development Groundwork
    > or
    > Development Support


    Oh, so you want a name for everything but the pure programming
    (defined as the activity which starts with an idea and ends with an
    untested, undocumented executable).

    I think it's both pointless and harmful to try to split those. Don't
    do it.

    /Jorgen

    --
    // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
    \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
    Jorgen Grahn, Sep 22, 2011
    #4
  5. DeMarcus

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    On Thu, 2011-09-22, Ian Collins wrote:
    > On 09/22/11 09:25 PM, DeMarcus wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >> is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >>
    >> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>
    >> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>
    >>
    >> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above?

    >
    > Pain.
    >
    > With the exception of Unit testing which is development.


    When they are painful, it's partly because people like us don't
    think they are important enough to do right, or they are "someone
    else's" problem, or something ...

    All the thing listed exist for one reason: so we can do our job.

    /Jorgen

    --
    // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
    \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
    Jorgen Grahn, Sep 22, 2011
    #5
  6. DeMarcus

    DeMarcus Guest

    On 09/22/2011 01:17 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
    > On Thu, 2011-09-22, DeMarcus wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >> is there a common name for all the things around software development?

    >
    > Maybe ... software development?
    >
    >> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>
    >> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>
    >>
    >> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    >> any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >>
    >> Development Groundwork
    >> or
    >> Development Support

    >
    > Oh, so you want a name for everything but the pure programming
    > (defined as the activity which starts with an idea and ends with an
    > untested, undocumented executable).
    >
    > I think it's both pointless and harmful to try to split those. Don't
    > do it.
    >


    We have the same opinion but let me explain. There are situations when
    it's bad to put them together. It's when the manager says; focus on the
    programming! (so documentation and unit tests are left out since the
    manager thinks those are optional)

    If they're split I believe we can track the quality of it better. Just
    like we split software development and software architecture, I would
    like to split development and work connected to development to be able
    to give the work connected to development a name to be able to give it
    better focus.


    /Daniel
    DeMarcus, Sep 22, 2011
    #6
  7. DeMarcus

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    On Thu, 2011-09-22, DeMarcus wrote:
    > On 09/22/2011 01:17 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

    ....
    >> Oh, so you want a name for everything but the pure programming
    >> (defined as the activity which starts with an idea and ends with an
    >> untested, undocumented executable).
    >>
    >> I think it's both pointless and harmful to try to split those. Don't
    >> do it.
    >>

    >
    > We have the same opinion but let me explain. There are situations when
    > it's bad to put them together. It's when the manager says; focus on the
    > programming! (so documentation and unit tests are left out since the
    > manager thinks those are optional)


    Argh.

    > If they're split I believe we can track the quality of it better. Just
    > like we split software development and software architecture, I would
    > like to split development and work connected to development to be able
    > to give the work connected to development a name to be able to give it
    > better focus.


    I think the manager might be happier if he gets to choose the name for
    it. Then you write a fake magazine article about how great FOO is, let
    a friend do a business magazine-style layout, and slip it between page
    4 and 5 in one of the glossies your manager is reading ;-)

    (Seriously, I have no good suggestions. Maybe something with
    "maintainability" or "long-term survival" in the name.)

    /Jorgen

    --
    // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
    \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
    Jorgen Grahn, Sep 22, 2011
    #7
  8. DeMarcus

    none Guest

    In article <4e7aff26$0$283$>,
    DeMarcus <> wrote:
    >Hi,
    >
    >We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >
    >With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    >* Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >* Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >* Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >* Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >* Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    >
    >Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    >any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >
    >Development Groundwork
    >or
    >Development Support
    >
    >
    >Or is there already a common name?


    Not a single term for all of them.

    I've seen Configuration Management used for Version Controlling and
    sometimes build system.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_management#Software_configuration_management

    Unit Testing should be an integral part of development.


    Yannick
    none, Sep 22, 2011
    #8
  9. DeMarcus

    none Guest

    In article <>,
    Jorgen Grahn <> wrote:
    >On Thu, 2011-09-22, DeMarcus wrote:
    >> On 09/22/2011 01:17 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

    >...
    >>> Oh, so you want a name for everything but the pure programming
    >>> (defined as the activity which starts with an idea and ends with an
    >>> untested, undocumented executable).
    >>>
    >>> I think it's both pointless and harmful to try to split those. Don't
    >>> do it.
    >>>

    >>
    >> We have the same opinion but let me explain. There are situations when
    >> it's bad to put them together. It's when the manager says; focus on the
    >> programming! (so documentation and unit tests are left out since the
    >> manager thinks those are optional)

    >
    >Argh.
    >
    >> If they're split I believe we can track the quality of it better. Just
    >> like we split software development and software architecture, I would
    >> like to split development and work connected to development to be able
    >> to give the work connected to development a name to be able to give it
    >> better focus.

    >
    >I think the manager might be happier if he gets to choose the name for
    >it. Then you write a fake magazine article about how great FOO is, let
    >a friend do a business magazine-style layout, and slip it between page
    >4 and 5 in one of the glossies your manager is reading ;-)
    >
    >(Seriously, I have no good suggestions. Maybe something with
    >"maintainability" or "long-term survival" in the name.)


    No documentation might only create problems in the long-term but no
    unit tests...

    Manager:
    "Just focus on the code. just implement that feature as fast as
    possible, we need it yesterday! Implement this calculator now!"


    Dev:
    "OK, if you insist."

    int add(int a, int b)
    {
    return 7;
    }
    int mult(int a, int b)
    {
    return 12;
    }

    "Done! I've implemented both the add and mult function. I haven't
    had time to fully test it 'though."

    Manager:
    "That's alright. Just send it to the test department."

    ....
    none, Sep 22, 2011
    #9
  10. DeMarcus

    DeMarcus Guest

    On 09/22/2011 03:21 PM, none Yannick Tremblay wrote:
    > In article<>,
    > Jorgen Grahn<> wrote:
    >> On Thu, 2011-09-22, DeMarcus wrote:
    >>> On 09/22/2011 01:17 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

    >> ...
    >>>> Oh, so you want a name for everything but the pure programming
    >>>> (defined as the activity which starts with an idea and ends with an
    >>>> untested, undocumented executable).
    >>>>
    >>>> I think it's both pointless and harmful to try to split those. Don't
    >>>> do it.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> We have the same opinion but let me explain. There are situations when
    >>> it's bad to put them together. It's when the manager says; focus on the
    >>> programming! (so documentation and unit tests are left out since the
    >>> manager thinks those are optional)

    >>
    >> Argh.
    >>
    >>> If they're split I believe we can track the quality of it better. Just
    >>> like we split software development and software architecture, I would
    >>> like to split development and work connected to development to be able
    >>> to give the work connected to development a name to be able to give it
    >>> better focus.

    >>
    >> I think the manager might be happier if he gets to choose the name for
    >> it. Then you write a fake magazine article about how great FOO is, let
    >> a friend do a business magazine-style layout, and slip it between page
    >> 4 and 5 in one of the glossies your manager is reading ;-)
    >>
    >> (Seriously, I have no good suggestions. Maybe something with
    >> "maintainability" or "long-term survival" in the name.)

    >
    > No documentation might only create problems in the long-term but no
    > unit tests...
    >
    > Manager:
    > "Just focus on the code. just implement that feature as fast as
    > possible, we need it yesterday! Implement this calculator now!"
    >
    >
    > Dev:
    > "OK, if you insist."
    >
    > int add(int a, int b)
    > {
    > return 7;
    > }
    > int mult(int a, int b)
    > {
    > return 12;
    > }
    >
    > "Done! I've implemented both the add and mult function. I haven't
    > had time to fully test it 'though."
    >
    > Manager:
    > "That's alright. Just send it to the test department."
    >
    > ...
    >


    I like your way of sliding in TDD without anyone noticing, however, when
    it comes back from the test department, the time to fix it will be
    logged as bugfix on the developer's account. No salary raise that year
    either...
    DeMarcus, Sep 22, 2011
    #10
  11. DeMarcus

    DeMarcus Guest

    On 09/22/2011 03:12 PM, none Yannick Tremblay wrote:
    > In article<4e7aff26$0$283$>,
    > DeMarcus<> wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >> is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >>
    >> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>
    >> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>
    >>
    >> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    >> any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >>
    >> Development Groundwork
    >> or
    >> Development Support
    >>
    >>
    >> Or is there already a common name?

    >
    > Not a single term for all of them.
    >
    > I've seen Configuration Management used for Version Controlling and
    > sometimes build system.
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_management#Software_configuration_management
    >


    True, however, Configuration Management focus on a /part/ of, let's call
    it Development Support. Also, Configuration Management usually only
    involves a few people per team.

    > Unit Testing should be an integral part of development.
    >
    >


    That's true, but as I mentioned in another post, if we don't separate
    the things then these surrounding tasks (like TDD and documentation) are
    easy seen as optional by many, and the lack of it may pass unseen until
    it's too late. If we give it a name then we can just raise a hand and
    ask the narrow-minded manager; shall we skip Development Support or
    shall we continue using it? Then it becomes a bigger decision to take.

    I'm just ventilating my ideas. Maybe this is not a real problem worth
    chasing a naming convention for.

    /Daniel
    DeMarcus, Sep 22, 2011
    #11
  12. DeMarcus

    red floyd Guest

    On 9/22/2011 2:25 AM, DeMarcus wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    > is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >
    > With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    > * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    > * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    > * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    > * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    > * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    >
    > Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    > any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >
    > Development Groundwork
    > or
    > Development Support
    >
    >
    > Or is there already a common name?


    Software Engineering
    red floyd, Sep 22, 2011
    #12
  13. DeMarcus

    BGB Guest

    On 9/22/2011 11:51 AM, red floyd wrote:
    > On 9/22/2011 2:25 AM, DeMarcus wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >> is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >>
    >> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>
    >> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>
    >>
    >> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    >> any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >>
    >> Development Groundwork
    >> or
    >> Development Support
    >>
    >>
    >> Or is there already a common name?

    >
    > Software Engineering
    >


    yes, although often Software Engineer is also used as a glorified term
    for a Programmer (which doesn't necessarily imply doing things like
    documentation or writing unit tests).


    also fairly common is the "code and go" strategy, where one writes code,
    basically verifies that it about works (via manual testing), and calls
    it "good enough" until bugs or crashes start making an issue (then one
    goes and debugs them).

    if there are other people around, then usually they will be responsible
    for doing this other stuff (the documentation person documents it, and
    the tester tests it and reports bugs).

    or, otherwise, it is a single-person project, where one has to
    prioritize where they will invest their time, and where having good
    documentation may be a much lower priority than "getting it done" or
    "getting the next round of features added", ...

    a Programmer may differ some from a Coder, where the former is
    generally/often given the ability to think and write code independently
    (they decide the best way to implement the requirements, ...), whereas a
    Coder usually has all designs/specifications/... handed down "from
    above", say: "here is a class diagram, list of functions and methods,
    and behavioral descriptions. now go implement it." (in this case, the
    Software Engineer is generally the person who writes up the stuff that
    the coder goes and implements).

    the differences can be subtle, and often the term "programmer" is used
    in the same sense as "coder" above.


    but, used in-sense, Software Engineer implies doing lots of design and
    trying to make everything proper and similar (like, the whole "engineer"
    part).


    however, in my case, I mostly just claim to be a programmer.

    although what I do does have some overlap with what would be considered
    a software-engineers' area (being a lone developer, I deal with pretty
    much everything), the primary goal remains that of getting things
    implemented and working, ideally in a timely manner (and usually getting
    things working "now" is a much higher priority than any future
    maintainability).


    or such...
    BGB, Sep 22, 2011
    #13
  14. On Sep 22, 5:25 am, DeMarcus <> wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    > is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >
    > With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >
    > * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    > * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    > * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    > * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    > * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >
    > Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    > any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >
    > Development Groundwork
    > or
    > Development Support
    >
    > Or is there already a common name?


    Well:

    "Software Engineering"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering

    is the complete set. And "engineering" at least connotes robust/
    reliable/solid etc which requires those "surrounding", as you put it,
    practices. At it's core engineering is about eliminating or greatly
    reducing human error in the application of science to control.

    KHD
    Keith H Duggar, Sep 22, 2011
    #14
  15. DeMarcus

    Ian Collins Guest

    On 09/22/11 11:36 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
    > On Thu, 2011-09-22, Ian Collins wrote:
    >> On 09/22/11 09:25 PM, DeMarcus wrote:
    >>> Hi,
    >>>
    >>> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >>> is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >>>
    >>> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>>
    >>> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >>> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >>> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >>> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >>> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above?

    >>
    >> Pain.
    >>
    >> With the exception of Unit testing which is development.

    >
    > When they are painful, it's partly because people like us don't
    > think they are important enough to do right, or they are "someone
    > else's" problem, or something ...


    Oh I do think they are important. In the last team I managed, my only
    non-manger direct reports were the chaps who looked after the above
    (less unit tests). "SCM Admins" we called them.

    --
    Ian Collins
    Ian Collins, Sep 22, 2011
    #15
  16. DeMarcus

    DeMarcus Guest

    On 09/22/2011 09:23 PM, BGB wrote:
    > On 9/22/2011 11:51 AM, red floyd wrote:
    >> On 9/22/2011 2:25 AM, DeMarcus wrote:
    >>> Hi,
    >>>
    >>> We all do software development. Some even do software architecture. But
    >>> is there a common name for all the things around software development?
    >>>
    >>> With things around software development I mean for instance:
    >>>
    >>> * Version controlling, e.g. cvs, svn, git, etc.
    >>> * Documentation, e.g. Doxygen, etc.
    >>> * Bug- and issue tracking, e.g. Bugzilla, Jira, etc.
    >>> * Unit testing, e.g. TDD, etc.
    >>> * Build systems, e.g. TeamCity, etc.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Is there a common name for all that kind of work above? I couldn't find
    >>> any on the net so I just invented two alternatives to start with:
    >>>
    >>> Development Groundwork
    >>> or
    >>> Development Support
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Or is there already a common name?

    >>
    >> Software Engineering
    >>

    >
    > yes, although often Software Engineer is also used as a glorified term
    > for a Programmer (which doesn't necessarily imply doing things like
    > documentation or writing unit tests).
    >
    >
    > also fairly common is the "code and go" strategy, where one writes code,
    > basically verifies that it about works (via manual testing), and calls
    > it "good enough" until bugs or crashes start making an issue (then one
    > goes and debugs them).
    >
    > if there are other people around, then usually they will be responsible
    > for doing this other stuff (the documentation person documents it, and
    > the tester tests it and reports bugs).
    >
    > or, otherwise, it is a single-person project, where one has to
    > prioritize where they will invest their time, and where having good
    > documentation may be a much lower priority than "getting it done" or
    > "getting the next round of features added", ...
    >
    > a Programmer may differ some from a Coder, where the former is
    > generally/often given the ability to think and write code independently
    > (they decide the best way to implement the requirements, ...), whereas a
    > Coder usually has all designs/specifications/... handed down "from
    > above", say: "here is a class diagram, list of functions and methods,
    > and behavioral descriptions. now go implement it." (in this case, the
    > Software Engineer is generally the person who writes up the stuff that
    > the coder goes and implements).
    >
    > the differences can be subtle, and often the term "programmer" is used
    > in the same sense as "coder" above.
    >
    >
    > but, used in-sense, Software Engineer implies doing lots of design and
    > trying to make everything proper and similar (like, the whole "engineer"
    > part).
    >
    >
    > however, in my case, I mostly just claim to be a programmer.
    >
    > although what I do does have some overlap with what would be considered
    > a software-engineers' area (being a lone developer, I deal with pretty
    > much everything), the primary goal remains that of getting things
    > implemented and working, ideally in a timely manner (and usually getting
    > things working "now" is a much higher priority than any future
    > maintainability).
    >
    >
    > or such...


    I like your definitions. How about this?

    * Software Architect - Designs frameworks, communication and
    dependencies in applications and between applications.

    * Software Engineer - Designs specific modules in an application, often
    specialized in some field like mathematics, protocols, or certain domain
    specific knowledge.

    * Coder - Implements specifications. Could be a person directly from school.


    / Daniel
    DeMarcus, Sep 23, 2011
    #16
  17. DeMarcus

    Rui Maciel Guest

    Keith H Duggar wrote:

    > Well:
    >
    > "Software Engineering"
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering
    >
    > is the complete set. And "engineering" at least connotes robust/
    > reliable/solid etc which requires those "surrounding", as you put it,
    > practices. At it's core engineering is about eliminating or greatly
    > reducing human error in the application of science to control.


    The field of engineering involves a considerable expectation of a safe and
    defect-free product, to the point where engineers, when recognized as such,
    are held civil and criminally liable for any problem which may arise from
    their work. This is the main reason why civilized societies put
    restrictions on who can and cannot label themselves an engineer (i.e.,
    engineering licenses), and consequently who can be employed to positions
    which require the level of expertise and responsibility which is expected
    from an engineer.

    The practice of software development does not have such responsibility nor
    is a software developer held liable for any defect in their work.
    Therefore, no professional license is required by society to perform this
    job. This means that software development, although a highly technical
    field, is not engineering, and those who are employed to churn out code
    aren't engineers. And this is a good thing.


    Rui Maciel
    Rui Maciel, Sep 23, 2011
    #17
  18. DeMarcus

    Rui Maciel Guest

    red floyd wrote:

    >> Or is there already a common name?

    >
    > Software Engineering


    Among the tasks which were pointed out, I fail to find a single task which
    can be labelled as engineering. This means that, although some software
    developers might wish to be labelled as engineers, that doesn't mean it's
    true.

    This reminds me how the so called "railroad engineers" are often used as a
    reference of a professional practice which abuses the term "engineer" as a
    form of grandstanding, while avoiding other terms which are more appropriate
    to the task they actually perform such as "train operator" or "train
    driver". The thing is, even though the so called "railroad engineers" are
    clearly not engineers, their job actually requires a level of
    responsibility, and therefore civil and criminal liability, far greater than
    that which is required for a typical software developer job. Therefore, if
    it doesn't make sense to label a "train operator" as an engineer then why
    would it make sense to try to label a software developer as one?


    Rui Maciel
    Rui Maciel, Sep 23, 2011
    #18
  19. DeMarcus

    Ian Collins Guest

    On 09/23/11 10:11 PM, Rui Maciel wrote:
    >
    > The field of engineering involves a considerable expectation of a safe and
    > defect-free product, to the point where engineers, when recognized as such,
    > are held civil and criminally liable for any problem which may arise from
    > their work. This is the main reason why civilized societies put
    > restrictions on who can and cannot label themselves an engineer (i.e.,
    > engineering licenses), and consequently who can be employed to positions
    > which require the level of expertise and responsibility which is expected
    > from an engineer.
    >
    > The practice of software development does not have such responsibility nor
    > is a software developer held liable for any defect in their work.
    > Therefore, no professional license is required by society to perform this
    > job. This means that software development, although a highly technical
    > field, is not engineering, and those who are employed to churn out code
    > aren't engineers. And this is a good thing.


    So those of us with Electronic Engineering degrees (including members of
    professional bodies) aren't engineers either?

    --
    Ian Collins
    Ian Collins, Sep 23, 2011
    #19
  20. DeMarcus

    Rui Maciel Guest

    Ian Collins wrote:

    > So those of us with Electronic Engineering degrees (including members of
    > professional bodies) aren't engineers either?


    It really depends on what you are doing. Not everything a
    civil/structural/mechanical/aeronautical/etc engineer does is engineering.

    Nevertheless, the level of restrictions and assurances that a society
    requires in order to grant someone the ability to exercise the practice of
    "engineering" (i.e., the license), along with the civil and criminal
    responsibility it imposes on those who practice it, is a good litmus test to
    see if a field is in fact engineering.


    Rui Maciel
    Rui Maciel, Sep 23, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. moo moo
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    375
    Henrique Seganfredo
    Nov 20, 2003
  2. -
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    317
  3. Bart Simpson
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    635
    logistix at cathoderaymission.net
    Oct 13, 2003
  4. Piet
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    526
  5. Network/Software Buyer
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    414
    Network/Software Buyer
    May 23, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page