Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK) v4.0 is out [pdf]

Post by patmorgan23 » Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 2:02 AM UTC

rockemsockem wrote: post #63

lantry wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my "pro-stagnation" argument: stagnation and stability are pretty much the same thing. There's a lot of infrastructure that we take for granted because it always works (water purification and distribution, bridges and roads, electrical generation and transmission, automobile engines, the quality of gasoline, the safety of food, etc). You trust that these things will work the way you expect, because they don't…

So I don't know about you, but I live in America where roads, electrical generation and transmission, water purification, and bridges are all in subpar shape. That's super broad and I think there are complex reasons why each of these has failed, but it's pretty clear that stagnation hasn't helped and has probably actively caused harm by letting incompetence become too common in these areas.

Post by mckn1ght » Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 2:08 AM UTC

rockemsockem wrote: post #64

Arainach wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's start by fixing the language. It's not stagnation, it's predictability. Civil and mechanical engineering are not static fields. They come up with new materials, new methods, new ideas. They have tooling to understand the impact of a proposed change and standard ways to test and validate things. It is much easier to predict how long it will take to both design and build things. These are all good things. We woul…

Why do you think such wrong things about civil and mechanical engineering. Tell me about all the on time and under budget civil/mechanical engineering projects that are happening. Do you think that just because they have physics to lean on that they can just like press solve and have accurate estimates spit out? Edit: I totally agree that more long-lived battle tested software toolchains and libraries would be great…

Post by Jtsummers » Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 2:19 AM UTC

eacapeisfutuile wrote: post #67

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #35

There appears to be a lot of hate towards this in the comments (because it's not perfect?), but I feel strongly that we need explicit bodies of knowledge, along with certifications for having been trained on it. Every company I go to, the base of knowledge of all the engineers is a complete crapshoot. Most of them lack fundamental knowledge about software engineering. And they all lack fundamental knowledge about the…

> Every company I go to, the base of knowledge of all the engineers is a complete crapshoot Sounds like unfortunate companies to go to. > much less teach them about it on the job That is literally how and where people learn the job pretty much everywhere. > it needs to be up to date Yeah, it will never be. > we need to prove people have actually read it and understood it Why/how?

Post by Jtsummers » Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 2:26 AM UTC

patmorgan23 wrote: post #71

rockemsockem wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I don't know about you, but I live in America where roads, electrical generation and transmission, water purification, and bridges are all in subpar shape. That's super broad and I think there are complex reasons why each of these has failed, but it's pretty clear that stagnation hasn't helped and has probably actively caused harm by letting incompetence become too common in these areas.

This is just not the case. The US has lots of infrastructure that needs repair or replacement, but there are very few areas that do not have clean water, or reliable electricity (Sans extreme weather which causes disruptions in every country), and roads and bridges are all safe to drive on (when was the last time you read about a bridge that collapsed from lack of maintenance?) The US has its issues, but it does actu…

Post by jdlyga » Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 2:30 AM UTC