I only consider Engineering to be the application of math and science to plan complex systems or structures.
If a person is doing that as a programmer then they have to already understand computer architecture to a bare minimum of how memory works physically, processor functionality, and discreet mathematics: which makes them a computer engineer.
If a person completely lacks understanding of math or physics behind the machines they code for then I don’t care how complicated their derivative work is: it is not engineering. Much like how painting is not engineering nor is balancing a stack of rocks.
Engineering is the application of math and science to plan complex systems and structures
Computer science teaches math and science to plan complex systems and structures
But you believe that computer science prepares students for “programming”, not engineering, so they aren’t engineers. Despite it being about the application of math and science to design complex systems and structures (engineering) and despite the fact that everyone else calls this profession software engineering and you call it programming. And you don’t think you have a bias?
It’s possible to learn how to do some limited engineering while working towards a comp sci degree but it doesn’t magically turn every task you perform into engineering. Programming isn’t engineering.
So engineering is not what you said you believe it is, you actually believe it’s what you said it is except software engineers because you’re a condescending gatekeeper. Software engineering is different from programming.
What is it that you think I said it was? Because I pretty clearly outlined how memorizing syntax, calling functions, and gradeschool algebra are not engineering.
Oh, boooo. Boooo! Come on, you were lining up a classic crowd favorite, the “Real Engineers understand the fundamentals” attack, then they hit you with the ol’ “Some programming courses teach the fundamentals” and you come back with this? No pivot to credentialing, no tirade about how software is all virtual so it’s not the same as building something with real materials, no grand declaration about how real engineers have to take their jobs seriously because lives are at stake? Just “no it’s programming not engineering they’re different”? Weak.
Back in my day we used to argue about whether or not software engineering is real engineering with some gumption.
I’m referring to the tropes of this tired-ass debate, I’m not saying there’s any merit to any of them. My heckle is mainly concerned with the lack of substance, even cliched or overused substance, behind the argument you’re trying to make. It sounds, based on the disrespectful way you describe coders as “syntax apes”, that you don’t really understand the craft of software development, the principles of engineering practice, or how the two intersect.
You sound like a clueless manager who thinks of devs as interchangeable and easily replaceable cogs in a software factory.
I only consider Engineering to be the application of math and science to plan complex systems or structures.
If a person is doing that as a programmer then they have to already understand computer architecture to a bare minimum of how memory works physically, processor functionality, and discreet mathematics: which makes them a computer engineer.
If a person completely lacks understanding of math or physics behind the machines they code for then I don’t care how complicated their derivative work is: it is not engineering. Much like how painting is not engineering nor is balancing a stack of rocks.
So you believe that
But you believe that computer science prepares students for “programming”, not engineering, so they aren’t engineers. Despite it being about the application of math and science to design complex systems and structures (engineering) and despite the fact that everyone else calls this profession software engineering and you call it programming. And you don’t think you have a bias?
It’s possible to learn how to do some limited engineering while working towards a comp sci degree but it doesn’t magically turn every task you perform into engineering. Programming isn’t engineering.
So engineering is not what you said you believe it is, you actually believe it’s what you said it is except software engineers because you’re a condescending gatekeeper. Software engineering is different from programming.
What is it that you think I said it was? Because I pretty clearly outlined how memorizing syntax, calling functions, and gradeschool algebra are not engineering.
We don’t get computer science degrees from gradeschool, goober.
You also don’t get math degrees period.
Oh damn, all those math credits I needed to graduate were for nothing?
As far as being an engineer goes, correct. Finally getting it.
any computer science course teaches those things
To prepare the student for programming not for engineering.
Oh, boooo. Boooo! Come on, you were lining up a classic crowd favorite, the “Real Engineers understand the fundamentals” attack, then they hit you with the ol’ “Some programming courses teach the fundamentals” and you come back with this? No pivot to credentialing, no tirade about how software is all virtual so it’s not the same as building something with real materials, no grand declaration about how real engineers have to take their jobs seriously because lives are at stake? Just “no it’s programming not engineering they’re different”? Weak.
Back in my day we used to argue about whether or not software engineering is real engineering with some gumption.
Engineers are rarely menial labourers so idk what you mean by programming being virtual. Like 98% of engineering work is planning diagrams.
My argument has always been that the work is different between a syntax ape and an engineer.
I’m referring to the tropes of this tired-ass debate, I’m not saying there’s any merit to any of them. My heckle is mainly concerned with the lack of substance, even cliched or overused substance, behind the argument you’re trying to make. It sounds, based on the disrespectful way you describe coders as “syntax apes”, that you don’t really understand the craft of software development, the principles of engineering practice, or how the two intersect.
You sound like a clueless manager who thinks of devs as interchangeable and easily replaceable cogs in a software factory.
I accept your resignation.
Losing an argument so hard you have to just assert that you won…
I recognize their style, I think they did that with me too once. 😆 Very, very weak.