Software """""engineer"""""

>Engineers design materials, structures, and systems while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety, and cost.

no problem there, chief.

Anyone who understands what modern software engineering is wouldn't have a problem. It resembles the other disciplines heavily, it isn't just code hacking.

I went into CS thinking the term was funny and after getting hammered with several different SWE courses and actually working with ME's and EE's in industry I realize there is real similarity.

It sounds funny to people because the image of the "Engineer" is still that guy hammering a vehicle prototype together in a sweaty storm

>software """architecture"""

Love case love

...

>nigga_you_think_Im_reading_all_that_shit.jpg

Nice madpost

what baffles me is why on earth, from all the professional groups these guys decided to pick engineers to mimic

not lawyers, not doctors, who make hueg dosh through self governance, but engineers who need adults (like managers) to run the things, and are really scrapping the bottom in their institutions

It concerns the process of software development. Modern applications are incredibly large with distributed components. It's like building a big machine.

You guys are so fucking out of touch with the real world on this board it's hilarious. You criticize what you know nothing about. They aren't fucking diagnosing a patient.

Mechanic

the whole body of knowledge of this so called """engineering""" consists of the gang of four book (that was never relevant), and uml / sequential diagrams

the whole field is a joke, and if you think otherwise you're just a tourists in the profession.

Computer """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""science"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

pleb

why the fuck would anyone want to be any kind of engineer is beside me desu

Yeah, that's all there is to it. Nice 5 minute google research.

Veeky Forums, what should I major in if I want to study theoretical computer science/type theory? math or cs?

CS. Good CS programs have a lot of math and abstract learning in them. Minor in math if you're that interested. You should be able to pick a concentration in CS theory as well, being able to choose particular class electives that correspond.

Software architect

yeah, don't do this. Most CS programs will just teach you coding and a little bit of theory if you choose to take those classes. If you actually want to learn a significant amount of theory, do math. You'll be able to take theory classes and get enough math background/mathematical maturity to actually do real theory work.

I'm not sure this is about being old-school, instead, most people who just passed their courses to get an eng. degree indeed don't do much eng..
They usually become managers and do other business stuff.

So If you did good and you actually understand shit then most likely you can get an actual eng. job.
I would recommend getting an MSc and look for jobs at places where they actually do design and research. Also, get good at programming, but don't let them give you a shitty programming (only) job. Consider this a long-term rather than a short term advice. Still, building circuits yourself and doing experiments is a good learning experience. It helps with really understanding stuff.

I'm EECS, but honestly I think the problem comes from that CS/SE people and eng. people have different foundations for their fields. For classical eng. fields it usually lies in physics and calculus/analysis. For CS people, it's foundations are in discreet math and the theory of computation aka it's strictly mathematics.

Things are increasingly interdisciplinary today though, hence CpE/EECS/Mechatronics, etc. . Lot of CS concepts are extremely useful in classical engineering disciplines starting from simulations, AI to optimizations. (Google research about antenna design and genetic algorithms for example.)

If we say an engineer is someone who intuitively feels and sees the abstractions and his design then indeed SE is eng..
However if we say that eng. is rooted in the physical sciences then SE is not eng.
Honestly, I agree with this distinction, but it's no big deal. My main reason for this is that above a certain level SE/CS and EE people can't really do each others "jobs", not really good at each others abstractions.
An EE can program, but he/she most likely won't understand easily why a problem can't be solved due to insufficient understanding of CS theory or how to solve it efficiently. CS/SE people usually have no knowledge of EE.

There's an evil reason they do this, it's so standards bodies can form and hand out licenses and shit.

"I'm sorry, you aren't allowed to possess a compiler it's for licensed engineers only you could damage proprietary software"

kek

That's actually a good read though.