undefined | Better HN

0 pointshwayne5y ago0 comments

I used to think this, and then I interviewed people who did both traditional and software engineering professionally, and now I'm not so sure. I did a first draft of what I learned here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3018ABlET1Y

I'm hoping to have a written version by the end of September.

0 comments

ozim5y ago

This is great. People romanticize construction, mechanical and other engineering like there would be no failures in those disciplines. Buildings collapse, machines break down in unforeseen circumstances. My pet theory is that in software it is just a lot easier to create a lot of stuff, so it is also a lot easier to create issues.

You can add that in eastern Europe you can get engineering degree which is "technical bachelor" from technical university, so I am software engineer as it is printed in my diploma.

gjulianm5y ago

It's not about the failures, it's about the modes of failure. I assume that the modes of failure of a bridge, or of a building, are pretty well understood.

Software has far more distinct pieces than any other product you can find anywhere (maybe the human body?) so it's impossible to completely check the modes of failure. I was just reading before about a hardware corruption bug due to a kernel feature [1] and it's hard to imagine the same chain reaction in other engineering areas.

In software it's also really hard to model behavior. In engineering you'll get tolerances, strength and other features of the pieces you use. In software, you can't even benchmark something and expect the same benchmark to translate to a different computer.

1: https://lwn.net/Articles/304105/

rwoerz5y ago

Yes, software is immaterial and thus not constrained by laws of physic (except speed of light). It is comparably easy to change but also comparably hard to specify and model in advance.

mkoubaa5y ago

I'm a mechanical engineer who writes software for mechanical engineers. I find that the work of MechE moves slower due to operational issues. if there could move fast and break things cheaply to get to market faster they would. all that matters is that the final product is tested and hardened which is something that software shops mostly do anyways

not to mention things like generative design and process automation are getting us to that point.

fmakunbound5y ago

Fair enough! You make some great points there which changed my perspective.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse