"If programming was going to turn into something like civil engineering or auto repair, it would have already. The computer industry is 50 years old."

Yeah, sure -- we've been making buildings for thousands of years, but a formal civil engineering practice is only a (relatively) recent innovation. Previously builders just sort of did their best and learned from others mistakes. A lot like how programming (currently) is.

I think it's _way_ too early to see where computer programming is going to end up. Neither of the analogies is particularly apt, since civil engineering is essentially applying scientific methods to well-understood problems. A particular steel beam might have a particular tensile strength, weight, and other well-known properties. Likewise a wooden beam has "well known" properties. The decision of which to use is based on mathmatical formulas balancing cost vs. risk.

Likewise with the auto-mechanic analogy -- you can become an auto mechanic with little or no formal training, simply learning on the job. Unfortunately you also don't need an IQ much above 80 either. In any event, auto mechanics don't build cars or design them -- professional engineers do that.

I tend to agree with another poster that pushed a craftsman analogy. Although craftsmen are basically seat-of-the-pants engineers, they do make things (unlike mechanics), and their work is as much art as science (much like programming is right now). Blacksmiths might not know the precise tensile strength of a particular metal bar, but they can experiment a bit and probably find something that will work.

I think that this 'craftsmen' approach to programming will disappear, replaced with an 'engineer' approach, but only as the problem domains become well-known, predictable, and measurable. This might take hundreds of years, by which time human 'computer engineers' will probably be replaced with intelligent systems, and programming will be like talking to an assistant is now.

In reply to Re: Re: The future of software design by Anonymous Monk
in thread The future of software design by bprew

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.