3 ms·
It can be in some circumstances.. I think that the engineering mindset (adherence to the scientific method, evidence based decisions, planning for the future e
by cameronbrown 7y ago
It can be in some circumstances..
I think that the engineering mindset (adherence to the scientific method, evidence based decisions, planning for the future etc..) is one that is definitely shared by both groups at least.
But you can absolutely get away with building software without proper engineering standards. It's not so easy to build bridges that way.
- klowner 7y agoToo many companies taking a "McMansion" approach to software and we wonder why everything is constantly broken.
- 1234_UUUU_99 7y ago> It's not so easy to build bridges that way. I'd wager that it is but the stakes for failure are too high to wing it (hopefully). Imagine: We want to build a bridge that spans N meters. We don't know how to do it but we can go look at an existing bridge and copy it. We might not understand metallurgy / physics that well, but we talk to suppliers and ask for "steel of this shape and size". Ditto cables, concrete and everything else. Probably, provided we're not scaling up or changing the design too much, it would work just fine.
- radicalbyte 7y agoYou have cowboy builders in the "engineering" area too. For some reason in software we seem to be more accepting of it.
- cameronbrown 7y agoFor most non-engineers (either kind), engineering is just a means to an end, i.e. don't care about the finer details as long as it works. When software goes wrong, the effects are more often than not, intangible. When mechanical engineering or electrical engineering goes wrong, people can die. Software can obviously kill people too, it just happens less. Then industry practices revert to the mean due to cost cutting.