sschnellm@cc.curtin.edu.au (04/09/91)
I would like to hear some personal opinions on the following
question :
What is Software Engineering ???
Is it
1. Management of People,
2. Management of Software,
3. Management of Hardware,
4. Management of Specifications.
Please respond by email and I'll post a summary.
Thanks in advance for your time.
Marcus Schnell
sschnellm@cc.curtin.edu.aumcgregor@hemlock.Atherton.COM (Scott McGregor) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.114709.7695@cc.curtin.edu.au>, sschnellm@cc.curtin.edu.au writes: > What is Software Engineering ??? > Is it > 1. Management of People, > 2. Management of Software, > 3. Management of Hardware, > 4. Management of Specifications. Is there any reason to believe that the above define Software Management rather than software engineering? Or is the implication that Software Engineering is somehow a subdiscipline of Industrial Engineering? Wouldn't a more correct description of software engineering be something like the discipline applying scientific methods and mathematical models to the domain of software construction by analog to say civil engineering or electrical engineering? Scott McGregor
hawksk@lonex.radc.af.mil (Kenneth B. Hawks) (04/11/91)
In article <1991Apr9.114709.7695@cc.curtin.edu.au> sschnellm@cc.curtin.edu.au writes: > >I would like to hear some personal opinions on the following >question : > > What is Software Engineering ??? > > Is it > > 1. Management of People, > 2. Management of Software, > 3. Management of Hardware, > 4. Management of Specifications. > Software engineering is none of the four choices above!!! As the word "engineering" should imply, it has nothing to do with management. (This is not to imply that management has nothing to do with s/w engineering) In its broadest sense, software engineering is the discipline of applying engineering principles to the design and development of software. Computer software should not be an art form. It should be engineered according to accepted engineering standards and conventions. In an industry that can't agree on the definition of a "computer" (for some very good reasons), the methods and engineering principles are up for debate and evolving. I have yet to be able to go to my hardware store and buy the universal solvent (it seems packaging it becomes a problem). Likewise, I haven't run into software engineering techniques that apply to every situation. Ken Hawks Rome Laboratory
jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) (04/13/91)
>I have yet to be able to go to my hardware store and buy the >universal solvent (it seems packaging it becomes a problem). Likewise, I >haven't run into software engineering techniques that apply to every situation. There is no engineering technique in ANY engineering discipline that applies to every situation. Civil engineers use different tools and approaches depending on the application domain: you don't build a nuclear power plant the same way you build a retaining wall. Specialists arise in engineering disciplines familiar with the generally-accepted tools and techniques for a PARTICULAR kind of problem. That software is no different is not surprising. The difference with software is that there are often no generally-accepted tools and techniques: THAT'S where we are still more an art than a science (all engineering disciplines still retain some portion that is art). Considering the youth of software, the lack of standardization is not surprising. Being a software engineer for 30 years is like being a civil engineer for six THOUSAND years. In software, we recently discovered the arch... -- * The opinions expressed herein are my own, except in the realm of software * * engineering, in which case I borrowed them from incredibly smart people. * * * * Rational: cutting-edge software engineering technology and services. *