ENvironmentally Friendly Inter City Aircraft powered by Fuel Cells

Don Tuite wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:33:28 -0600, "Jon Woellhaf"
wrote:

Matt Whiting asked ... "What are the software equivalent of Maxwell's
equations?"

Knuth

A stretch. "GOTO Seen Harmful"? K&R? I don' think that dog's gonna
hunt. You've gotta get down to Shannon, which I don't think answers
the question wrt programming.

If Swain had a contrary opinion, I'd listen to it.

Don

K&R isn't even close. Knuth is getting closer. I personally think that
Nicklaus Wirth has come the closest to software engineering, but even he
is more of a computer scientist than an engineer and much the same holds
for Dijkstra.

Matt

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

I'll agree to disagree. I thought the same as you until I got my EE
degree. There is simply no comparison. The Comp Sci degree was a walk
in the part compared to EE. And EE's design based on mathematical and
physical principles.

your CS degree didn't include any numerical analysis? or discrete math?

Yes, but that was not used in practice. I'm sure their are some folks
who use math in practice, but I've come across VERY few. OTOH, EE, ME
and other engineers use their math tools almost daily.

The reality is that most software that is developed really is about
process and programming, not engineering. Very few programmers can
predict in advance exactly how fast their programs will execute. As a
structural engineer, I can predict with pretty high accuracy how much my
structure will deflect under various loads, what its frequency response
will be to excitation from earthquakes or wind, etc. I've only
extremely rarely seen anything even close to this in the software world.


I almost never used math when working as a software developer.

you never did any dsp code? Some of the software developers I'm
working with now are doing a considerable amount of math (the
exact nature of this application is sensitive so I won't go into
details)

No, I never had occasion to write DSP code. I worked in control systems
and similar embedded systems for process and machine control.

Matt

kontiki wrote:
Bob Noel wrote:


you never did any dsp code? Some of the software developers I'm
working with now are doing a considerable amount of math (the
exact nature of this application is sensitive so I won't go into
details)


Exactly. It's obvious Matt has never done any serious
design and development of bleeding edge software, so he
just calls software engineers 'geeks' in order to marginalize
the whole thing and make himself feel better.

Personally I've met just as many geek hardware guys as
software guys and I've worked in both environments.


Do you have degrees in both computer science and engineering? If you
do, then we can talk further. If you don't, then you don't know what
you are talking about. I have degrees in both and they are vastly
different.

Matt

kontiki wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:


I'll agree to disagree. I thought the same as you until I got my EE
degree. There is simply no comparison. The Comp Sci degree was a
walk in the part compared to EE. And EE's design based on
mathematical and physical principles. I almost never used math when
working as a software developer.


FYI I have an EE degree... my minor was in CS. In the areas I have
worked I have actually found software more challenging than hardware
(and I've done both). Just because you never used your CS knowledge
to do much of anything complicated does not mean others don't.

Finally... controlling systems in real time demands that
you understand the engineering laws of electronics/physics
because you design the software to perform the calculations/transforms
or whatever else to produce to correct result... as well as
perform tasks that check the resulting action to insure it
is working then take corrective action if it doesn't.

It takes an excellent electrical engineer to design these
systems. You can marginalize it all you want.


I absolutely agree that it takes an excellent electrical engineer to
design these systems! That was my point. And electrical engineer is an
engineer. A "software engineer" who has no engineering degree or
background is not an engineer.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:
Don Tuite wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:33:28 -0600, "Jon Woellhaf"
wrote:

Matt Whiting asked ... "What are the software equivalent of Maxwell's
equations?"

Knuth

A stretch. "GOTO Seen Harmful"? K&R? I don' think that dog's gonna
hunt. You've gotta get down to Shannon, which I don't think answers
the question wrt programming.

If Swain had a contrary opinion, I'd listen to it.

Don

K&R isn't even close. Knuth is getting closer. I personally think that
Nicklaus Wirth has come the closest to software engineering, but even he
is more of a computer scientist than an engineer and much the same holds
for Dijkstra.

Edgar Codd based his relational database model on predicate logic and set
theory. I'd call it the rough equivalent of Maxwell's equations in the
database world. Databases are pretty fundamental to a lot of applications,
so I don't think it is that much of a stretch.

Jim Logajan wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:
Don Tuite wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:33:28 -0600, "Jon Woellhaf"
wrote:

Matt Whiting asked ... "What are the software equivalent of Maxwell's
equations?"

Knuth
A stretch. "GOTO Seen Harmful"? K&R? I don' think that dog's gonna
hunt. You've gotta get down to Shannon, which I don't think answers
the question wrt programming.

If Swain had a contrary opinion, I'd listen to it.

Don
K&R isn't even close. Knuth is getting closer. I personally think that
Nicklaus Wirth has come the closest to software engineering, but even he
is more of a computer scientist than an engineer and much the same holds
for Dijkstra.

Edgar Codd based his relational database model on predicate logic and set
theory. I'd call it the rough equivalent of Maxwell's equations in the
database world. Databases are pretty fundamental to a lot of applications,
so I don't think it is that much of a stretch.

Yes, I would tend to agree that the designer of the relational database
was engineering software or at least coming very close. However, I
disagree that the folks that use relational database and design
applications for them are performing engineering.

Unfortunately, what is called software engineering is seldom such. I'm
sure there are a handful of people in the world, but not many compared
to the more traditional engineering disciplines.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

Do you have degrees in both computer science and engineering? If you
do, then we can talk further. If you don't, then you don't know what
you are talking about. I have degrees in both and they are vastly
different.

Matt

No, I don't have degrees in both, only Electrical Engineering. But I
don't put down other engineering disciplines like you do. But hey...
like I said.. if it makes you feel better go for it. ;^)

Matt Whiting wrote:

I absolutely agree that it takes an excellent electrical engineer to
design these systems! That was my point. And electrical engineer is an
engineer. A "software engineer" who has no engineering degree or
background is not an engineer.



Whatever... I've interviewed both CS and EE's. Some were excellent
engineers, some were **** poor the rest were average and I never found
those with an EE degree any smarter (ona average) that those with a CS
degree. Attitude counts a lot more with me than what flavor engineering
degree one has. But that's me.

That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Bob Noel wrote:


you never did any dsp code? Some of the software developers I'm
working with now are doing a considerable amount of math (the
exact nature of this application is sensitive so I won't go into
details)


Exactly. It's obvious Matt has never done any serious
design and development of bleeding edge software,

How much of current (and past) software development is "bleeding edge"?

so he
just calls software engineers 'geeks' in order to marginalize
the whole thing and make himself feel better.

How many software "engineers" are actually mere "programmers"?

I recall many teenagers doing "software". I even recall many such places
being called "hobby shops".

Personally I've met just as many geek hardware guys as
software guys and I've worked in both environments.

Im not a software person, but I would suspect, based on the handful of
programs I wrote many years ago, that HARDWARE actaully requires/uses
engineering principles that software misses, or, being more abstract,
doesn't support.

IOW, software is more and ART, whereas hardware and other tangibles, are
true ENGINEERING projects.

kontiki wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:

Do you have degrees in both computer science and engineering? If you
do, then we can talk further. If you don't, then you don't know what
you are talking about. I have degrees in both and they are vastly
different.

Matt

No, I don't have degrees in both, only Electrical Engineering. But I
don't put down other engineering disciplines like you do. But hey...
like I said.. if it makes you feel better go for it. ;^)

I haven't put down any other engineering disciplines.

Matt