Talk:Software engineering

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is part of WikiProject Engineering, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, join the project, visit the project portal, and contribute to the project discussion. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. Top This article has been rated as top-importance. This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, which aims to create a comprehensive computer science reference for Wikipedia. Visit the project page for more information and to join in on related discussions. Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale Top rated as top-importance on the assessment scale

Archives

1 2 3 4

POV in lead

The term software engineer is used very liberally in the corporate world. Very few of the practicing software engineers actually hold Software Engineering degrees from accredited universities. In fact, according to the Association for Computing Machinery, "most people who now function in the U.S. as serious software engineers have degrees in computer science, not in software engineering".

This passage seems to carry an implication that software engineering is not an academically vetted title. The provided quotation is used to imply that software engineers are not trained as such; however, it is merely providing a statistical fact, that most software engineers are CS graduates. However, many CS curricula offer or require software engineering tracks -- the source states this. This is akin to saying that most AI researchers aren't "AI degree" holders, as I have yet to hear of any such thing. I think it would more true to say that most schools don't offer software engineering degrees because most don't consider it to be separate from computer science. Since I consider the above passage to be a plainly POV interpretation with selective quoting, I am removing the statement and will replace it with a more neutral one. Ham Pastrami (talk) 05:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is a full paragraph from the source, emphasis mine:

Most people who now function in the U.S. as serious software engineers have degrees in computer science, not in software engineering. In large part this is because computer degrees have been widely available for more than 30 years and software engineering degrees have not. Positions that require development of large software systems often list “Software Engineer” as the position title. Graduates of computer science, computer engineering, and software engineering programs are good candidates for those positions, with the amount of software engineering study in the programs determining the suitability of that graduate for such a position.

Ham Pastrami (talk) 05:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Category box not appearing

Does anyone know why the Category box isn't showing up? The text is there, but not the usual outline and shading that usually goes along with it. Ham Pastrami (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Never mind, looks like it was a problem with the Foundation's advertising banner. Ham Pastrami (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Not Engineers

I see that there is a discussion of this subject in the article. I just want to weigh in that programmers are not engineers because they do not work with physics. All engineering disciplines work with physics, such as kinematics, thermodynamics, or electromagnetics. The naming of this article, as opposed to it simply being a redirect to programmer, is propagating this misuse of the term engineer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.89.174 (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

With this definition, is it even possible to have a Software "Engineering" discipline or title. It is a stretch to say that Software Engineers use physics (or an understanding of physics) in their daily activities to develop software. Granted, the more a software developer gets into electronics, you could argue that they are an engineer, but... Maybe they ought to call it "Firmware Engineering".  :) Srfleckenstein (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

What's the source for the assertion that "All engineering disciplines work with physics?" One dictionary definition of engineering is:

1a. The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.

I don't see any restriction in there to physics. Surely chemical engineering is a discipline, but it is based on applications of chemistry, not physics. MIT, whose opinion ought to count for something, has a department of "biological engineering." A discipline of "agricultural engineering" has existed since the early 1900s.

I don't much like the term "software engineering." I think it carries a lot of ideological baggage with it. To my way of thinking, software development is still very much an art and will be for a very long time. But that's beside the point. The first thing is that it is a well-defined term in widespread use. You might as well complain that there is no such thing as an automobile, because they don't really move by themselves... or that the phrase "steep" learning curve should mean something that is learned very quickly... or that "taxpayer dollars" should be "taxpayer's dollars." It's beside the point. The language is what it is.

And the reason why software engineering is a misnomer is not that software engineering does not involve physics. It is that it is very hard to find any examples of the use of science or mathematics in a software engineering textbook. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)