Practitioners Beware: The New Model for Software Engineering May Turn out to be the next 'Holy Roman Empire'

An interesting phenomenon has evolved over the past 30-years, as several titles have been suggested for attempt to anthropomorphize the construct of ‘professionalism’ in Software practice, these titles include: programmer, engineer, architect and developer. The most recent iteration in the evolution of professionalizing the practice of Software (with a capital S) has been in the form of the professional engineer (PE) license. The on-going trend for definitively narrating the discipline and practice of Software manufacture motivates the discussion presented in this paper. The paper makes the argument that the constant struggle to define Software practice with a descriptive title, may in fact be as elusive as the historical failed attempt to define the ancient Holy Roman Empire. The 18th Century author Voltaire is credited with the famous phrase about the Holy Roman Empire, that it was “Neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.” This paper explores whether Software Engineering might in fact be, neither software, nor engineering, nor architecture – nor holy, nor Roman for that matter. The paper concludes with a proposed visual model to clarify thinking in this area.

[1]  W. W. Royce,et al.  Managing the development of large software systems , 1970 .

[2]  Donald E. Knuth,et al.  Computer programming as an art , 1974, Commun. ACM.

[3]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Balancing Agility and Dis-cipline: A Guide for the Perplexed , 2003 .

[4]  Maurice H. Halstead,et al.  Elements of software science , 1977 .

[5]  Raymond Turner,et al.  Philosophy of Computer Science: An Introductory Course , 2005 .

[6]  C. V. Ramamoorthy Computer Science and Engineering Education , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[7]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Will software ever work? , 2001, CACM.

[8]  Muhammad Ali Babar,et al.  10 years of software architecture knowledge management: Practice and future , 2016, J. Syst. Softw..

[9]  Judith A. Stafford,et al.  focus Past, Present, and Future of Software Architecture , 2006 .

[10]  Danny Weyns,et al.  Variability in software architecture: current practice and challenges , 2011, SOEN.

[11]  Allen Newell,et al.  Computer science as empirical inquiry: symbols and search , 1976, CACM.

[12]  Niklaus Wirth,et al.  Algorithms and Data Structures , 1989, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[13]  Mary Shaw,et al.  Prospects for an engineering discipline of software , 1990, IEEE Software.

[14]  Timothy Lethbridge,et al.  What knowledge is important to a software professional? , 2000, Computer.

[15]  Mary Shaw,et al.  Software architecture - perspectives on an emerging discipline , 1996 .

[16]  Brent K. Jesiek,et al.  Between Discipline and Profession A History of Persistent Instability in the Field of Computer Engineering, circa 1951-2006 , 2006 .

[17]  Matti Tedre The Science of Computing: Shaping a Discipline , 2014 .

[18]  Anthony I. Wasserman Toward a Discipline of Software Engineering , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[19]  Richard H. Austing,et al.  A survey of the literature in computer science education since curriculum '68 , 1977, CACM.

[20]  Leslie Lamport Who builds a house without drawing blueprints? , 2015, Commun. ACM.

[21]  Sandra Payette,et al.  Hopper and Dijkstra: Crisis, Revolution, and the Future of Programming , 2014, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing.