4 ms·

For some obtuse reason people think software is some ethereal magic abstraction that somehow doesn't follow any rules or practices. We have to start pushing for

For some obtuse reason people think software is some ethereal magic abstraction that somehow doesn't follow any rules or practices. We have to start pushing for the fact that yes, to engineer software you need a true engineer just like to engineer a house you need a true engineer. Nobody ever laments the fact that it's clear that basic construction workers could never engineer a building following all the best practices and regulations (and most importantly, know the pertinent laws of physics in detail). And yet we give basic programmers tasks such as developing a scheduler, a traffic management system and whatnot. I want programmers to have the right responsibilities and the right expectations, I want regulated proven industry standards that we can follow and I want software to suck less

emteycz 4y ago
Your whole argument breaks down when it is me - a "completely unqualified", uneducated person, but also a programmer since I was 6 y/o - who has to teach people with university diplomas how to do it correctly. Happens at every job I ever had. Overall, university diploma means absolutely nothing to me - sometimes it's a minus (because it sometimes grows a specific attitude that has no place in my teams). The only working indicator is time spent doing the job + personal interview.
rout39574 4y ago
The problem I see with this plan is that the state of the art in CS moves profoundly faster than the pace of careers, certifications, curriculum development, &c. Imagine, if you will, the practices that would have been taught to the "By the book" computer engineers who graduated in 2000. Would you think it happy to have those practices dominant, by regulation, today? Would you want to have the task of lobbying the professional standards committees to update the curriculum so that a decade from now the thing you think is important would be accepted practice? I think that the difficulty we have updating e.g. language versions or crypto practices is a good model for how well our field responds when we do things more formally. Imagine how long python 2 would be around if it had been the basis for professional credentials for decades!

emteycz 4y ago

Your whole argument breaks down when it is me - a "completely unqualified", uneducated person, but also a programmer since I was 6 y/o - who has to teach people with university diplomas how to do it correctly. Happens at every job I ever had. Overall, university diploma means absolutely nothing to me - sometimes it's a minus (because it sometimes grows a specific attitude that has no place in my teams). The only working indicator is time spent doing the job + personal interview.

rout39574 4y ago

The problem I see with this plan is that the state of the art in CS moves profoundly faster than the pace of careers, certifications, curriculum development, &c. Imagine, if you will, the practices that would have been taught to the "By the book" computer engineers who graduated in 2000. Would you think it happy to have those practices dominant, by regulation, today? Would you want to have the task of lobbying the professional standards committees to update the curriculum so that a decade from now the thing you think is important would be accepted practice? I think that the difficulty we have updating e.g. language versions or crypto practices is a good model for how well our field responds when we do things more formally. Imagine how long python 2 would be around if it had been the basis for professional credentials for decades!