On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> No, we all do not accept this assertion.
Then I apologize for mischaracterizing. I meant it more as a segue
from one conversation to the next than as an assignment of belief.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
> That's not
On Jan 23, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
>
> That's not to say there wouldn't be value to a separate certification
> for "life-critical software engineering" for those working in fields
> where that is applicable.
This is a hidden slippery slope. Is the FreeBSD kernel a "life-critical
appl
Daniel C. wrote:
> What I am curious about is what a standard in software engineering
> would look like...
>
> On a more general level, what would the goals of such a standard be?
>
> Obviously "writing programs that don't kill people" is one of them,
> but what else?
Actually, it wouldn't, but
hello world!
On 1/23/12 2:55 PM, Daniel C. wrote:
So, we all accept that the title Professional Engineer [deleted]
On 01/23/2012 03:09 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
No, we all do not accept this assertion.
a better engineer would have validated that assertion before continuing.
--
http://or8.n
On 1/23/12 2:55 PM, Daniel C. wrote:
So, we all accept that the title Professional Engineer (the one with
the specific legal meaning - not the lowercase engineering that we all
do every time we write a program) does not apply to what we as
software developers do.
No, we all do not accept this a
So, we all accept that the title Professional Engineer (the one with
the specific legal meaning - not the lowercase engineering that we all
do every time we write a program) does not apply to what we as
software developers do. (It would be difficult to argue with this
since there is no Professiona
