🫠 too real
I’m realizing how over engineered Claude’s solutions are. I have realized now just today that it’s best at just dding tiny updates to code. Not good at architecting anything new at all that has to work for longer than 5 days.
I spent like an hour yesterday bullying Claude out of using a ResizeObserver, Refs and a useEffect construct just to fix the height of a container (there was a bug where the container didn’t properly scale down in height because some weird hard-coded properties in an external component inside of it). I knew that it had to be solvable with just the right css selector, but I was lazy and didn’t want to manually go through the html and figure out which selector on which component would be the right one. And on paper “Go through this massive block of html and check which property is out of place” should be the kind of use case where LLMs actually work. The stupid thing introduced two new different catastrophic failure modes where the entire browser crashed due to excessive rerenders before it found something that even remotely worked. And then I had to spend another hour stripping out unnecessary style properties it glued on while looking for a working solution. In the end, I probably would have been much faster doing it by hand.
Yea if you don’t explicitly give it direction on how to keep the code maintainable, it will gladly just spew shit into the same file until you have 10K LOC in it.
To be fair I used to make entire features like this and then get R# to move the classes into separate files at the end. Guess I don’t like to organise too early, before the code has found it’s true form?
Not even. Your job isn’t to protect prod, it’s to take the blame when prod goes down.
of they expect you to write or go through 1000s of lines of code in a single day. your whole job isn’t programming, is to be the scapegoat.
Ah the ol please
Remember that you are also collecting the responsibility of 10 and the pay of 1.
Shift + Tab + Fuck it.
Mixed feelings because obviously studying for a degree implies maths and sciences which does qualify you as an engineer, but imo “software engineer” isn’t a real thing. You’re either a computer engineer or a code monkey.
An old professor of mine made the half-joke that anything with ‘science’ in its name isn’t really science. He was a computer science professor.
I suppose he meant that computer science is closer to applied science aka. engineering than ‘real’ science like maths and physics, and all their subcategories.
Anyway… In the end everyone that graduated studying computer science got a Bachelor/Masters degree of science, not engineering… And it doesn’t matter anyway…
You’re right, we should let people who know HTML print out their own degrees equivalent to a 6 year discipline with specific application of math and science. /sarcasm
It matters.
i think the word “engineer” has something to do with the word “ingenuity” … now ask yourself, how much creative thinking do you need as a coder?
Depends on the task, somewhere between next to none and actual engineering.
You should post this to UnpopularOpinions.
TBH it’s not easy to get 98 people to engage with a bottom of the list comment so clearly some part of it is botted, which tracks because I’m pissing off sloppers and slopper admins every time I visit this instance.
The default sorting is hot - which does not show your comment at the bottom of the list. It’s not a conspiracy, you just said something incredibly naive about a field that is over represented on lemmy.
I’m not on Lemmy. Lemmy is maintained by people who deny trans rights and fight for Russia.
Gosh, did I say you were?
yes
Where?
Do… Do you think software on its own needs no engineering?
If I say please build me a webshop from scratch, do I need a “computer engineer” which presumingly includes hardware knowledge by your distinction? Probably not. Is a code monkey going to build me the website? Also probably not.
So somewhere inbetween the two, you probably need a position that can engineer complex pieces of computer code, along with its design and architecture - we could even call it something short, like a software engineer or something
Programmer
A programmer builds the software. An engineer designs it.
Lmao ok pal
That explains why all the programmers carry around hammers. You know. To help them type in the word CMake.
I’m not sure what you mean about hammers, but I mean build as in implementation, not build as in compile.
This guy is just lost. Everybody knows engineers drive trains.
I can tell you have a bachelor’s of engineering. Not because I think you’re being elitist. But because you haven’t yet figured out that words are fluid and don’t follow strict rules like systems do.
English is hard.
I have a B.E. as well. It took me years to word good.
You’re on Lemmy so you’d be better off learning Mandarin or Russian.
Words which indicate a minimun amount of trained and proven competence or authority, such as Doctor or Police Lieutenant, are not things you can just claim willy nilly.
If I say the word Dr. Dre, do you know who I’m talking about? If the answer is yes, then you understand that the word doctor is not always about the medical profession.
Dude, an Engineer drives a fucking train
I can respect that but you need to propose a new term for structural and electrical engineers to replace it if that’s where we draw the line.
You’re continuing to prove my point. Words can have multiple meanings. Words change over time. The definition of a word is whatever people use it as.
If tomorrow every bus driver becomes a transportation engineer, and everyone starts calling them that, then that’s what engineer means.
If you cannot accept the above, you cannot properly participate in English.
As a mechanical engineer: if a software engineer completed school, they’re an engineer, deal with it. We’re not talking about someone that doesn’t know what they’re doing cobbing things together for 1-off demos like Michael Reeves
Random insult to a guy that does entertainment quite well. Am I reading too much into it or are you randomly extra pissed?
From the videos I’ve seen, he just does trial and error - no math or understanding involved. That’s not engineering - that’s called design. Didn’t stop him from bashing engineers in one of his videos saying that school was pointless. After that, I stopped watching his videos. Thankfully I only wasted time on 2-3 of them, including the swearing roomba.
Meanwhile I highly doubt he knows (or knew) anything about fatigue, trusses, or kinematics, things you have to have an understanding of in mechanical engineering. Maybe he learned after the fact, but I don’t really care.
You are not the target. And the says a lot of random shit just to flame imo.
I enjoy his videos because they are funny, not to learn any engineering skill
And the says a lot of random shit just to flame
So you admit he’s an asshole. Why should anyone waste their time on his videos then?
I’m assuming you’ve never experienced the world of safety critical software development like the medical and aerospace industries.
An engineer can code but a programmer is not an engineer. I have actually, btw, though not as a programmer but closely with them.
This is very much a US specific thing
Your opinion is bad then. And I realize the irony of saying that with my username.
maybe on krypton code monkeys are licensed and everyone else is just doing engineering
“Software engineer” will be a thing when it’s licensed by the state. Until then, we’re all just glorified cowboy-coders with no accountability.
(Speaking as computer programmer with an EIT in a different field.)
“Software Engineer” is a title that is licensed by professional engineering organizations in Canada. Would you acknowledge that it’s “a thing” in Canada?
Assuming the provincial or national government requires you to have such a license or be working under supervision of someone who does in order to be employed in the practice of making software, then yes.
idk about grue but imo that depends on the requirements of the title. If you need to be a real engineer capable of doing real engineering work to claim it then by all means.
If you need less than 14 math credits and only general ed science requirements, then no.
CAEB accredites Canadian university programs, including civil engineering programs, electrical engineering programs, and yes, software engineering programs. In addition, provincial engineering organizations such as PEO require that all professiomal engineers are employed as engineers in training (EIT) for a period of time, have passed an ethics exam, and are in good professional standing.
TL;DR: yes, officially recognized software engineers are real engineers in Canada.
The other key requirements I hope your licensing has are continuing education requirements and, most importantly, the notion of being a professional and having accountability to the public, not just your employer. Just taking one college class where you learn about Therac-25 isn’t enough; a professional software engineer also needs to have the power to refuse unethical demands by their employer (e.g. to build dark patterns or otherwise enshittify the software) and have that judgement be backed up by the state.
Alright but it feels like you didn’t really touch on my personal requirements and just appealed to authority.
You can see the CEAB accredited programs and decide for yourself if they meet your personal criteria – they all seem to include a substantial variety of advanced mathematics.
I’m sensing that you may be an engineer in another discipline who feels jealous that the horde of unregulated software engineers are diluting your title. It’s a valid concern in my opinion, and one that is shared by organizations like PEO who have and will take action on people using the term incorrectly, although their resources and jurisdiction are obviously limited. The key differentiation is between a licensed, professional software engineer with a stamp, and a software developer who was given “engineer” in their title at work.
During my computer engineering degree I was required to take enough math credits to earn a mathematics minor, and I learned the physics of transistors at a quantum level as part of the core curriculum. Do you think I can call myself an engineer, or should I limit it to just - what was the wording you used - oh yeah, syntax ape?
IIRC you can’t actually use the title “Engineer” prefixed or not without having a P.Eng license here in Canada. Of course, that didn’t stop my previous American employers from giving me the title of Software Engineer but it’s not supposed to be allowed
Which is completely stupid, you can perform engineering without having paid the order and it doesn’t feel like there’s any other word that explains the job quite as easily.
Looking up synonyms though it seems I could legally call myself a “software mastermind”, “software plotter” or “software captain”.
I do agree partially but I also get wanting “engineer” to be a protected term. I think software design is probably one more valid uses of the term but I think applying it to everything ain’t it (I.e. sanitation engineer).
Tbh I’m happy enough just having a Software Developer title
I mean it’s fine, but development is only one part of engineering, which is why I don’t like the term.
That’s fair… lately I’ve been more of a Kubernetes configurator than a developer so I get you
Yeah, I’ve looked it up and this is definitely the case, I’ve also had both Canadian and American employers refer to my position this way continuously with no repercussions (I similarly have an engineering degree in another field and was an eit and am now in software).
It’s weird because if the provincial engineering societies were serious about enforcing their rules, it would take them ZERO effort to find thousands and thousands and thousands of violations through like a single LinkedIn search. The fact that they dont put in such a minimal amount of effort kind of signals they don’t care about the rule.
Yeah, I moved into software from electrical engineering. “Software engineers” are rarely doing engineering. Though, weirdly, the LLM-assisted coding methods seems to be leading to more of a focus on specs, design documents, and testing methodology, which almost makes it more like actual engineering.
It’s not a real thing because it’s virtual? Or not being regulated makes it not a real thing?
I only consider Engineering to be the application of math and science to plan complex systems or structures.
If a person is doing that as a programmer then they have to already understand computer architecture to a bare minimum of how memory works physically, processor functionality, and discreet mathematics: which makes them a computer engineer.
If a person completely lacks understanding of math or physics behind the machines they code for then I don’t care how complicated their derivative work is: it is not engineering. Much like how painting is not engineering nor is balancing a stack of rocks.
So you believe that
- Engineering is the application of math and science to plan complex systems and structures
- Computer science teaches math and science to plan complex systems and structures
But you believe that computer science prepares students for “programming”, not engineering, so they aren’t engineers. Despite it being about the application of math and science to design complex systems and structures (engineering) and despite the fact that everyone else calls this profession software engineering and you call it programming. And you don’t think you have a bias?
It’s possible to learn how to do some limited engineering while working towards a comp sci degree but it doesn’t magically turn every task you perform into engineering. Programming isn’t engineering.
So engineering is not what you said you believe it is, you actually believe it’s what you said it is except software engineers because you’re a condescending gatekeeper. Software engineering is different from programming.
What is it that you think I said it was? Because I pretty clearly outlined how memorizing syntax, calling functions, and gradeschool algebra are not engineering.
any computer science course teaches those things
To prepare the student for programming not for engineering.
Oh, boooo. Boooo! Come on, you were lining up a classic crowd favorite, the “Real Engineers understand the fundamentals” attack, then they hit you with the ol’ “Some programming courses teach the fundamentals” and you come back with this? No pivot to credentialing, no tirade about how software is all virtual so it’s not the same as building something with real materials, no grand declaration about how real engineers have to take their jobs seriously because lives are at stake? Just “no it’s programming not engineering they’re different”? Weak.
Back in my day we used to argue about whether or not software engineering is real engineering with some gumption.
Engineers are rarely menial labourers so idk what you mean by programming being virtual. Like 98% of engineering work is planning diagrams.
My argument has always been that the work is different between a syntax ape and an engineer.
I’m referring to the tropes of this tired-ass debate, I’m not saying there’s any merit to any of them. My heckle is mainly concerned with the lack of substance, even cliched or overused substance, behind the argument you’re trying to make. It sounds, based on the disrespectful way you describe coders as “syntax apes”, that you don’t really understand the craft of software development, the principles of engineering practice, or how the two intersect.
You sound like a clueless manager who thinks of devs as interchangeable and easily replaceable cogs in a software factory.
I get your point but I’m not going to pull out my whole resume when, at the end of the day, I write software for a living.
Programmer is shorter and more honest than software engineer, tho
True. It doesn’t include my (legally recognised) title, however
Programmers and Software Engineers are different things, tho
Programmers and Engineers are different things, tho
Yes. But software engineers are engineers. Not all programmers are software engineers.
Not all software engineers are engineers and furthermore software isn’t an engineering discipline to begin with.
The industry has landed on the term. Nothing can be done about it regardless of anyone’s opinion for or against.
Pretty “hail corporate” response. I admit the first time I saw the word being on a Google jib listing over a decade ago might be part of my strong opposition.
I’ve been involved in math, software and hardware. The core function is the same: finding solutions to problems. Pedantically gatekeeping, I have little knowledge of engines. I’m grateful that usage is antiquated.
Wait, are you a Someordinarygamer fan?
no
