You mean you wouldn't expect a software engineer to understand the coefficient of thermal expansion of tungsten carbide in a gas lubricated piston/cylinder pneumatic deadweight calibration system?

Yeah, me either. But I would expect one to know how to research the documentation to find out what it meant.

[–] andreluis034@bookwormstory.social 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Even though my job title has "engineer" in it, I don't agree that it should be considered an area of engineering.

Yeah, me either. But I would expect one to know how to research the documentation to find out what it meant.

I wouldn't even expect most of them to this kind of research, no. On top of that, I see "engineering" also carrying some type of accountability and responsibility. For example, civil engineering, there are often regulatory bodies, codes, and standards that engineers must adhere to, and they are legally responsible for the safety and integrity of their projects. While in the software side of things, standards and best practices are more loose. Unless you're working in safety critical industries (automotive, aviation, etc...), the "accountability structure" is completely different, if existent at all. Calling themselves Software developer or some derivate would make much more from my point of view.

[–] Michal@programming.dev 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And software development isn't actually development. They don't build houses!

[–] andreluis034@bookwormstory.social 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Did you mean to say software architecture?

[–] Floshie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What about software painting ?

[–] andreluis034@bookwormstory.social 1 points 9 months ago

Can't wait to see the next Mona Lisa of software as an exhibition at the Louvre!

[–] Kage520@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the idea is, most people could build a doghouse with no training, but you need planning and education to plan/build a skyscraper. If you want to write your own app at home, maybe no software planning is really required. Keep nailing in workarounds. But if you want to build a huge system, you need to do a bit more than workarounds. You need a good plan from the start to make it all efficient and in a manner others can contribute to the code base.

That said, I feel like just having workarounds is really common even in large industry settings. Maybe I'm wrong though. I'm more of a home doghouse builder type myself.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

Anyone can build a bridge. Only an engineer can build a bridge that barely stands.

In the same way, the fact that one built a large online platform, that doesn't necessarily mean it was built with minimal ressources and without taking past or future risk.

Engineering is, as a profession, specifically the application of scientific principles to solve problems the right way, the first time, that is to say efficiently, and with minimal risk.

The fact that one codes, or wields a wrench, or operates a C&C machine does not mean one is applying science to solve problems efficiently and managing risk. These are entirely different skills and professions.

[–] captainthroatfuck@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

Why? Excited to hear another internet hot take