What exactly is 'Software Engineering'?

The Corinthian

irishguy wrote: »

They are interchangeable terms there is no difference only a job title.

I don't know if I would entirely agree with you. Certainly, I do think they are practically synonyms, however I have noticed over the years slight variations on how they are used.

Engineer tends to be used more often by those in a role that involves more low-level or complex programming. It is also used to give the impression of the role belonging a profession - to give it more gravitas.

Developer is a looser term because you can still 'develop' with a WYSIWYG or a CMS, so non-programmers will often use this term, especially with the Web. This is not to say that they won't use terms like engineer too, but last time I came across a Frontpage 'Engineer', I laughed.

Programmer is the original, old-school, term. It's still used, but I feel it's gone somewhat out of fashion, in favour of the former two.

Sparks

irishguy wrote: »

From quite a few of the responses its obvious some people havent a clue what they are talking about and dont work in a commercial environment. They are interchangeable terms there is no difference only a job title.

They're interchangeable by a lot of SMEs in the industry.
However, SMEs in the industry do not determine the terminology used by the practitioners; the practitioners do, mainly through evolved convention both in practice and in training. That's how ever other branch of engineering (civil, mechanical, and so on) has worked for hundreds of years.

For a good illustration, TC's statement that some of us call ourselves engineers "to give the impression of the role belonging a profession" is both wrong and right at the same time. I call myself an engineer because that's what I am - if a BAI from the oldest engineering school there is doesn't make you a "real" engineer, then a lot of people have a lot to think about. But that's a title awarded by practitioners. The job titles I've held in a few SMEs over the years haven't been "engineer", they've been things like "developer", "programmer", "programmer analyst", and so on - and those titles hold no meaning outside of the company that assigned them.

To use a metaphor, your official title in the industry has scope - your current job title has scope in your current company, but your industrial title (engineer in this case) has a much wider scope and isn't permanently overridden by your current company's choice.

However, if you look at the older, more established branches of engineering, their job titles tend to align to the ones used by the industry as a whole. We're just seeing the early days of this branch, so things haven't settled down that much yet.

One of the more interesting questions though, is whether Computer Science and Computer Engineering are going to wind up merged in the end, or whether they'll keep seperate identities. Either's possible, and I have no idea which way it'll go.

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

Developer is a looser term because you can still 'develop' with a WYSIWYG or a CMS, so non-programmers will often use this term, especially with the Web. This is not to say that they won't use terms like engineer too, but last time I came across a Frontpage 'Engineer', I laughed.

I can't agree with this statement, 'programmer' is a term for someone who programs, ie is handed a spec. and in theory produces verbatim what is spec'd. A developer is a more rounded individual in terms of their position and in my experience is a term usually adopted in SMEs in particular as there is more of a practical hands on approach to development. A 'developer' will research, design, document, program, deal with customers etc. and altogether contribute more to the company than just a 'programmer' and that's not a derision of the term 'programmer', it just means they HAVE to do it as it's an SME thing. Anyone can use use WYSIWYG or a CMS (even programmers!), that's not development, that's known as 'Application Building' and it's a completely different discipline yet can be performed by almost anyone. Even Accountants!

The Corinthian

Any 'programmer' who does not research or document, is not very good at their job. Design is something that is left to a senior technical resource, an 'architect', and while an 'architect' is almost by definition also a 'programmer', the reverse is not true - a college graduate might be able to code, but I wouldn't put them in charge of designing a system. Where it comes to dealing with customers, that's what analysis (and project managers) do - that's their role.

Certainly in SME's you're likely to have someone adopting multiple roles, but that does not mean that the roles are not actually separate. For example, in an SME, it'll probably be one of the programmers who will also manage the network too - but network administration is also separate role, and the only reason they're doing it is someone has to.

As to the developer term, I merely gave my experience of how I've seen it used and I have seen it used more loosely. You can call using a WYSIWYG or CMS 'application building', but I've yet to see the job title of 'application builder' (might well exist, but it's certainly not commonplace). Such people tend to be referred to as 'developers', rather than 'programmers' or 'engineers' - or less commonly nowadays as 'webmasters'.

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

Any 'programmer' who does not research or document, is not very good at their job. Design is something that is left to a senior technical resource, an 'architect', and while an 'architect' is almost by definition also a 'programmer', the reverse is not true - a college graduate might be able to code, but I wouldn't put them in charge of designing a system. Where it comes to dealing with customers, that's what analysis (and project managers) do - that's their role.

Certainly in SME's you're likely to have someone adopting multiple roles, but that does not mean that the roles are not actually separate. For example, in an SME, it'll probably be one of the programmers who will also manage the network too - but network administration is also separate role, and the only reason they're doing it is someone has to.

As to the developer term, I merely gave my experience of how I've seen it used and I have seen it used more loosely. You can call using a WYSIWYG or CMS 'application building', but I've yet to see the job title of 'application builder' (might well exist, but it's certainly not commonplace). Such people tend to be referred to as 'developers', rather than 'programmers' or 'engineers' - or less commonly nowadays as 'webmasters'.

There is no direct relationship between programming and research & documentation. So to say someone is bad at their job because they do their job is nonsense. The research and documentation that you speak of is called a spec. and is in the strictest commerical sense handed to the programmer. If a programmer engages in research and documentation thus contributing to the spec they are developers. They are developing the software, not just programming it.

The Corinthian wrote: »

You can call using a WYSIWYG or CMS 'application building', but I've yet to see the job title of 'application builder' (might well exist, but it's certainly not commonplace).

I call using a WYSIWYG or CMS 'application building' because that's what it is. It doesn't matter whether or not you've seen/heard it as a title before, that's what it is.

Placebo

Id like to see a programmer write a full software spec.

The Corinthian

Galtee wrote: »

There is no direct relationship between programming and research & documentation.

Programmers never document their code then? Or research how best to tackle a specific problem? Or research in general, for that matter?

The research and documentation that you speak of is called a spec.

Actually it's not what I was discussing. And if it was, why would it be a spec? Why not a requirements document?

If a programmer engages in research and documentation thus contributing to the spec they are developers.

No, they're engaging in two roles, that of the programmer and that of the analyst. You can call it developer if you like.

The thing is that all of these roles overlap in practice, it's why it is so difficult to define the terms. Even where one can argue that they are supposed to do X, Y and Z according to the official computer science definition, the reality is such definitions have long been blurred or ignored in the commercial World.

I call using a WYSIWYG or CMS 'application building' because that's what it is. It doesn't matter whether or not you've seen/heard it as a title before, that's what it is.

Well, if you say so, I'm sure it must be so. What would you call someone who does 'application building' then?

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

Programmers never document their code then? Or research how best to tackle a specific problem? Or research in general, for that matter?

Are you referring to commenting code? Surely you wouldn't document code outside of the IDE? What's the point in that if it's written to spec?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Actually it's not what I was discussing. And if it was, why would it be a spec? Why not a requirements document?

Because it's a Spec. which has been laid down based on a list of requirements.

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, they're engaging in two roles, that of the programmer and that of the analyst. You can call it developer if you like.

So what are they then? A programmer or an Analyst?

The thing is that all of these roles overlap in practice, it's why it is so difficult to define the terms. Even where one can argue that they are supposed to do X, Y and Z according to the official computer science definition, the reality is such definitions have long been blurred or ignored in the commercial World.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, if you say so, I'm sure it must be so. What would you call someone who does 'application building' then?

A moderator.

The Corinthian

Galtee wrote: »

Are you referring to commenting code? Surely you wouldn't document code outside of the IDE? What's the point in that if it's written to spec?

So coders (using this term, to avoid any arguments) need not document how their code works for anyone who may take over their work, beyond in-source commenting?

Because it's a Spec. which has been laid down based on a list of requirements.

I was wondering why you focused on that rather than the requirements document. Not really important.

So what are they then? A programmer or an Analyst?

Effectively both. The term programmer-analyst also exists, but in practice the industry has increasingly separated the two roles, making each more specialized.

A software project requires multiple skill-sets and roles, and as they have become more complex and demand for greater specialization has increased, these roles have slowly separated into different jobs. A 'webmaster' used to be a similar hybrid of roles fifteen years ago, but as the Web became sophisticated, those roles separated and people began to specialise in each of them.

As to how the terms developer, programmer or engineer are used, I have simply given my opinion based on how they are used in practice in the commercial World. They've become effectively synonyms, but with slight differences (as observed by myself and others). And no doubt in the future they will evolve even further.

A moderator.

Actually moderators don't 'build' systems, they operate them. I moderate a few forums here and I can tell you that I never had to 'build' any of them, with or without a WYSIWYG or CMS, I only moderate the content using the pre-built system. Hint: it's in the name.

stevenmu

This all seems pretty straightforward, so lets add consultants to the mix as well

:pac:

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

So coders (using this term, to avoid any arguments) need not document how their code works for anyone who may take over their work, beyond in-source commenting?

I was wondering why you focused on that rather than the requirements document. Not really important.

Effectively both. The term programmer-analyst also exists, but in practice the industry has increasingly separated the two roles, making each more specialized.

A software project requires multiple skill-sets and roles, and as they have become more complex and demand for greater specialization has increased, these roles have slowly separated into different jobs. A 'webmaster' used to be a similar hybrid of roles fifteen years ago, but as the Web became sophisticated, those roles separated and people began to specialise in each of them.

As to how the terms developer, programmer or engineer are used, I have simply given my opinion based on how they are used in practice in the commercial World. They've become effectively synonyms, but with slight differences (as observed by myself and others). And no doubt in the future they will evolve even further.

Actually moderators don't 'build' systems, they operate them. I moderate a few forums here and I can tell you that I never had to 'build' any of them, with or without a WYSIWYG or CMS, I only moderate the content using the pre-built system. Hint: it's in the name.

Wow, you are either A) Deliberately completely ignoring the point to keep this conversation going cause it's a slow news week and nothing happening in the Dev forum or Have no clue what an actual spec is without googling the term.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Actually moderators don't 'build' systems, they operate them. I moderate a few forums here and I can tell you that I never had to 'build' any of them, with or without a WYSIWYG or CMS, I only moderate the content using the pre-built system. Hint: it's in the name.

So why aren't you called operators then?

Sparks

Galtee wrote: »

So why aren't you called operators then?

Because our role is primarily social as well as technical.
For example, telling two posters to take a deep breath and to refocus on the post rather than the poster...

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

So why aren't you called operators then?

In any context I've heard operator in IT it has been quite technical. Such as a NOC operator or even just a computer operator (who would be part of an operations team to keep infrastructure maintained and running).

I would believe an operator would be closer to a system administrator then someone who enforces client rules.

I think I get what you are trying to say about "Application Building", but the line where someone is a developer or an application builder is not clear. At what level of abstraction is someone not developing any more?

Galtee

Sparks wrote: »

Because our role is primarily social as well as technical.
For example, telling two posters to take a deep breath and to refocus on the post rather than the poster...

With the utmost respect I do agree with your sentiment. I have now taken a deep breath, thanks.

Also, having a quote button available means that you provide the facility to focus on a poster AND the post, ie what it is they have posted regarding the 'post'. I have taken another deep breath I am refocused.

Galtee

Procasinator wrote: »

In any context I've heard operator in IT it has been quite technical. Such as a NOC operator or even just a computer operator (who would be part of an operations team to keep infrastructure maintained and running).

I would believe an operator would be closer to a system administrator then someone who enforces client rules.

I think I get what you are trying to say about "Application Building", but the line where someone is a developer or an application builder is not clear. At what level of abstraction is someone not developing any more?

I see,
Firstly, if you can switch on a computer and type your name you are strictly a computer operator as you are operating a computer.

Secondly, a programmer can also 'build applications' it doesn't make him an application builder. The term software developer focuses on the Software Development Lifecycle which consists of (I'll do it in todays terms) Business Analysis, Architecture, Design, Technical Architecture => Spec, Programming, Testing, Documentation, Support) BTW this makes no provisions for iterative visits to each stage or lunches with potential clients etc.

In terms of title a programmer will program but a Software Developer could have a hand in all of the above stages. It relates directly to the development lifecycle. I find it very hard to believe that some people (in the trade) think it's relating 'application building'.
Bizarre.

The Corinthian

Galtee wrote: »

Wow, you are either A) Deliberately completely ignoring the point to keep this conversation going cause it's a slow news week and nothing happening in the Dev forum or Have no clue what an actual spec is without googling the term.

1. I've not ignored the point, I've simply disagreed with what you are saying and have given my reasons for doing so.
2. Much of what I do for a living involves writing specs, so you'll forgive me if I consider your comment asinine.

So why aren't you called operators then?

Because our primary job is to moderate posts. I'm sure you could call us operators, but it wouldn't really describe our primary job. If you called us Whinge Filters, that would probably be more accurate.

For this we use a Web interface, but we didn't 'build' boards with any CMS or WYSIWYG; that is left to someone employed by Boards.ie Ltd and is a very different role. For a start, they get paid. They're also not 'customer' facing.

Those who specialize in producing Wordpress or similar sites will be what you refer to as 'application builders' - the thing is though, they typically go by the term 'developer', because they are effectively 'developing' the site (just using more abstract tools than a coder would). This is why I said that the meaning of this term is, or has become, looser than 'engineer' or 'programmer'.

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

I see,
Firstly, if you can switch on a computer and type your name you are strictly a computer operator as you are operating a computer.

If I jumped in a forklift and did some donuts I'd be a forklift operator, but not in the job title sense.

Galtee wrote: »

Secondly, a programmer can also 'build applications' it doesn't make him an application builder. The term software developer focuses on the Software Development Lifecycle which consists of (I'll do it in todays terms) Business Analysis, Architecture, Design, Technical Architecture => Spec, Programming, Testing, Documentation, Support) BTW this makes no provisions for iterative visits to each stage or lunches with potential clients etc.

In terms of title a programmer will program but a Software Developer could have a hand in all of the above stages. It relates directly to the development lifecycle. I find it very hard to believe that some people (in the trade) think it's relating 'application building'.
Bizarre.

Does a software developer need to be involved in all them processes? Say if someone is commissioned to design and develop a website. They do requirements gathering, business analysis, research. During which, they find an off-the shelf product (such as a CMS) matches all the client's requirements and so no additional "programming" is required. So they describe the architecture of this product, install it and support it.

Are they an application builder or a software developer?

Does a software developer only exists in some software development lifecycles?

If someone is doing Agile development, and as such relies on regular feedback and testing in combination with developing. The process that turns the requirement list to a specification document might not exist? Are these people programmers or software developers?

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

1. I've not ignored the point, I've simply disagreed with what you are saying and have given my reasons for doing so.
2. Much of what I do for a living involves writing specs, so you'll forgive me if I consider your comment asinine.

Because our primary job is to moderate posts. I'm sure you could call us operators, but it wouldn't really describe our primary job. If you called us Whinge Filters, that would probably be more accurate.

For this we use a Web interface, but we didn't 'build' boards with any CMS or WYSIWYG; that is left to someone employed by Boards.ie Ltd and is a very different role. For a start, they get paid. They're also not 'customer' facing.

Those who specialize in producing Wordpress or similar sites will be what you refer to as 'application builders' - the thing is though, they typically go by the term 'developer', because they are effectively 'developing' the site (just using more abstract tools than a coder would). This is why I said that the meaning of this term is, or has become, looser than 'engineer' or 'programmer'.

You didn't provide adequate reasons for disagreeing and your original comment implied that developers don't know how to program whereas programming is an intricate part of developing. Developers are programmers first, then everything else that goes with it.

Galtee

Procasinator wrote: »

If I jumped in a forklift and did some donuts I'd be a forklift operator, but not in the job title sense.

If you can operate something then you are an operator of that something. A computer operator is a general term for someone who can operate a computer but this could mean anything.

Procasinator wrote: »

If someone is doing Agile development, and as such relies on regular feedback and testing in combination with developing. The process that turns the requirement list to a specification document might not exist? Are these people programmers or software developers?

Agile what? Programming?

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

You didn't provide adequate reasons for disagreeing and your original comment implied that developers don't know how to program whereas programming is an intricate part of developing. Developers are programmers first, then everything else that goes with it.

So, your definition of a developer is a programmer plus one or more responsibilities within a software development lifecycle? If they don't have one or more responsibilities, they are just a programmer.

Also, you are implying if the implementation phase of a software development lifecycle does not involve writing actual code, it's no longer a software development and those involved are application builders?

If so, I disagree with these assertions. A label/title gives you a general idea of what someone does, it is not a well-defined universal formula that tells you exactly what they do.

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

If you can operate something then you are an operator of that something. A computer operator is a general term for someone who can operate a computer but this could mean anything.

Cool, I'm a fork-lift operator.

I think you take language too literally and a hindered by black and white thinking.

A computer operator in the context of professional titles would highly unlikely to mean someone who can turn a computer on, despite the dictionary definition of the word "operator". Context is always important in communication and interpretation.

The Corinthian

Galtee wrote: »

You didn't provide adequate reasons for disagreeing and your original comment implied that developers don't know how to program whereas programming is an intricate part of developing. Developers are programmers first, then everything else that goes with it.

My first post was clearly marked as an observation on how these terms are perceived in the Real World. You can continue to argue that a developer must be X, but that does not stop a Wordpress 'builder' calling themselves, and being called, a (Web) developer.

Neither does it imply that developers cannot program - I certainly never implied that.

These terms are used, and misused, in the commercial World and their de facto definition has drifted from their de jure one. If you take offence at that, by all means call yourself whatever you like.

Galtee

Procasinator wrote: »

Cool, I'm a fork-lift operator.

I think you take language too literally and a hindered by black and white thinking.

A computer operator in the context of professional titles would highly unlikely to mean someone who can turn a computer on, despite the dictionary definition of the word "operator". Context is always important in communication and interpretation.

You are quite right, interpretation is key

Procasinator wrote: »

the line where someone is a developer or an application builder is not clear. At what level of abstraction is someone not developing any more?

I would have thought that anyone in the industry could tell where the line lies here given that the term Software Developer refers to their role in the Software Development Lifecycle and that Software Developers are programmers before anything else but given that they are usually found in SMEs are involved in most or all aspects of the Development Lifecycle.

Procasinator wrote: »

A computer operator in the context of professional titles would highly unlikely to mean someone who can turn a computer on, despite the dictionary definition of the word "operator". Context is always important in communication and interpretation.

This is bordering on brainless and ironic for that matter given the thread is inadvertantly about pinning down titles, why not just call everyone who can use a computer including programmers et al. computer operators then and let people interpret that whatever way they want given the context?

Galtee

The Corinthian wrote: »

My first post was clearly marked as an observation on how these terms are perceived in the Real World. You can continue to argue that a developer must be X, but that does not stop a Wordpress 'builder' calling themselves, and being called, a (Web) developer.

Neither does it imply that developers cannot program - I certainly never implied that.

These terms are used, and misused, in the commercial World and their de facto definition has drifted from their de jure one. If you take offence at that, by all means call yourself whatever you like.

I do agree that terms are bandied around with no real meaning particularly in IT but it annoys me that there are so many people in the industry who don't know what they are talking about (and I'm not referring to you with that comment) and of all industries it is one that there is an abundance of material on thec web about and so everyone who can google feels they are in a position of commenting on it with purpose.

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

This is bordering on brainless and ironic for that matter given the thread is inadvertantly about pinning down titles, why not just call everyone who can use a computer including programmers et al. computer operators then and let people interpret that whatever way they want given the context?

Well, if you review most of the thread the prevailing argument is that you cannot pin it down and it's highly subjective. Any attempt to standardise the titles in the past has lead to debate. Software developer, software engineer, programmer, etc.

A lot of us that gave definitions gave personal opinions and they were clearly indicated as such. You can be black and white if you wish, but I wouldn't get frustrated if others disagree.

Galtee

Procasinator wrote: »

Well, if you review most of the thread the prevailing argument is that you cannot pin it down and it's highly subjective. Any attempt to standardise the titles in the past has lead to debate. Software developer, software engineer, programmer, etc.

A lot of us that gave definitions gave personal opinions and they were clearly indicated as such. You can be black and white if you wish, but I wouldn't get frustrated if others disagree.

Well in this particular instance, when defining a programmer it is black and white. The whole point of this thread in this forum is to discuss the point made by the op and in my mind there's no point in doing that if you can't learn from it. It's all about acquiring knowledge through discussion but that doesn't mean you can hide behnd the, "it's my opinion and I'm entitled to my opinion" umbrella. If you're not willing to take on board what people are saying and actually do a little bit of research on the back of it and learn then what's the point in wasting your time here? Is it to just argue points regardless? Indeed it is hipocritical of you, to try and push your opinion by trying to question my temperament.

Come back to me when you are willing to learn and then we can talk.

Procasinator

Galtee wrote: »

Well in this particular instance, when defining a programmer it is black and white. The whole point of this thread in this forum is to discuss the point made by the op and in my mind there's no point in doing that if you can't learn from it. It's all about acquiring knowledge through discussion but that doesn't mean you can hide behnd the, "it's my opinion and I'm entitled to my opinion" umbrella. If you're not willing to take on board what people are saying and actually do a little bit of research on the back of it and learn then what's the point in wasting your time here? Is it to just argue points regardless? Indeed it is hipocritical of you, to try and push your opinion by trying to question my temperament.

Come back to me when you are willing to learn and then we can talk.

First off, you need to calm down.

For starters, this "particular instance" we weren't talking about programmers individually, and I never really disagreed outright with you what a programmer is. We might only disagree on the level of abstraction (i.e. the 'line' I mentioned previously) the programming mechanism used. From what you have said previously, you probably wouldn't consider 4GL or 5GL programming language users as programmers.

I have no problem taking on board what people are saying. It should be obvious to you I am reading your posts, and digesting them. Otherwise I wouldn't be responding to you, would I? I however am not someone that has to deconstruct and provide acknowledgement on every little thing you say. Likewise, you haven't addressed many of my questions. Unless you consider "Agile what?" a mature response.

To be honest, this conversation with you is way to heated for such a simple topic. Come back to me when you are ready to control your ego and then we can talk.

Sparks

Galtee wrote: »

Come back to me when you are willing to learn and then we can talk.

Procasinator wrote: »

Come back to me when you are ready to control your ego and then we can talk.

And this is why we can't have nice things.

Everyone gets to step back and take a nice deep breath. I'll reopen the thread tomorrow.

Sparks

Reopened.

Trojan

Just as an aside: a "programmer" may not be a person who actually writes code - their task may be that of data entry - "programming" the machine. Not quite so black and white as claimed herein.

Not that I want to confuse matters, you understand