Slashdot Mirror
Software Engineering Body of Knowledge
An Anonymous Coward writes: "The IEEE has a project going to establish a Software Engineering Body of Knowledge. I'd recommend that all Slashdotters read this and send comments to this since this project could lead to the officially designating Software Engineers as a real Engineering discipline. That could then mean that licenses could be required to practice software development and that this could to regulation and other legal ramifications." On the surface this looks like a fairly boring document/process, but this is a major step forward - turning software engineering from an art into a science.
It doesn't mean your are considered useless.
Electricians and electrical technicians aren't useless. They can get good jobs, they just can't legally design commercial electrical products (unless they work under a supervising engineer, of course).Electrical Engineers go through Ethics courses and Occupational Safety courses, and they have to take responsibility for the things they make.
If a professional Engineer designs something, it _MUST_ work as specified. If it doesn't, the consumer can sue the engineer that made it. With software (which is not made by engineers) doesn't work, you can't do much about it. That's the difference between engineers and non-engineers.
We have had some discussion on the C++ newsgroups recently, regarding the possibility of getting a decent C++ certification scheme started in the industry. Bear in mind that we're talking about a major language here, and one that has an incredibly high number of "users" who don't really know the first thing about it -- or worse, get that first thing wrong -- but think they're experts. There is no single commercial body that "owns" C++, so no political spin needs to be put on things. Basically, this is a prime candidate for certification.
Except that we concluded viable certification was not going to happen. Without a major industrial sponsor, and without a large body of experts who are actually qualified to administer the necessary tests, you'd never get it off the floor.
And what would "certified in the use of C++" mean, anyway? There are many different areas of C++ programming, and while some projects use most/all of them, other projects would never use, for example, much of the STL. To have any practical use, any certification would have to be more precise than just "good at C++".
Remember, this is just one language, and still the expert population felt it would be impossible to provide an effective recognition in today's environment. What hope can anyone have of effectively regulating software engineering as a whole in this today's development world, then? There are more contradictions in this industry than anywhere else I've ever seen, with some companies successfully using development methods for years where other companies have failed completely using the same methods. Who's to say, with any justification or authority, which methods a "chartered software engineer" should use?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I guess computer geeks don't have a sense of humor. I remember hearing somewhere that C coders don't think VB programmers are real programers or something like that. Don't remember the specifics. Thought I would play on that.
I do have a real MCSE. And I also realize that any certification program run by a company's marketing department isn't a real certification.