Comments on: More Debate About Whether Software Development is Science or Art

By: Terrier

Terrier — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:37:21 +0000

Development is clearly and only a craft. Is carpentry engineering? The architect would like you believe that it is but the experienced carpenter knows better. Likewise, you can teach people engineering and expect that if they have enough intelligence they will ‘get’ it. The same is not true about developers. How many people have you worked with who were brilliant but couldn’t program their way out of a paper-bag? (BTW – I say craft only because art and science are not craft! (- takes all 3 to make a civilization.))

By: Marcelo Lopez

Marcelo Lopez — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:00:53 +0000

I have to agree with Daniel. I started my career in software before I achieved a degree ( it was much that way with many of us “back in the day” or it’s called ). We had formal training ( I’d was already a junior in college when I got my first REAL paying programming job ), but then came along this concept of “Software Engineering”. And frankly I have to admit to “falling for it”, because my present title includes the said “engineering” word in it.

So when I decided to go back to school and finish my degree, one of the “new” requirements was a Software Enginering class. Software models this, metrics that. Disemination, disemination, more like decimation. Decimation of most creative processes that take place in the practice ( why do we call it practice when we already know what we’re doing ? Practice makes perfect ? But I digress. ) of designing, implementing and maintaining software. Along what an earlier responder wrote, to my best estimation the process of Software Testing or Validation and Verification is mostly suited to having the “Engineering” term applied to it, because therein, those processes are is tied to input -> output, action -> reaction. In this age of Design-by-Contract, know your interfaces development, I know that there isn’t a single development organization where at least ONE developer/architect/coder hasn’t had to resort to some “Craft” to “magically” bring things together to work.

I got an A in that Software Engineering class, but boy was the whole ordeal fubar hoo-ey.

By: Daniel Lemire

Daniel Lemire — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:53:14 +0000

Marijn, I disagree that it is a matter of opinion. Either you can engineer a software project, or you can’t. If you can engineer it, then you can predict how long it takes and you can control its quality, you can standardize the projects, and so on. Or you can’t.

Either the engineer processes work or they don’t.

As far as I can tell, the sole engineer process that works is testing. Everything else is a waste of time. Hiring great programmers is the only thing that will save you.

By: Marijn Haverbeke

Marijn Haverbeke — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:57:27 +0000

Is it possible that this is a subjective, mostly pointless debate over affinities? Those that stress the rigorous and disciplined aspects of programming will go for the term engineering, those that like the creative problem-solving and the sudden insights will prefer to call programming an art.

I’m probably in the second camp — but in the end, who really cares what we call it. It’s fun.

By: andy

andy — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:19:18 +0000

To me the question seems a little misguided. If you ask whether X is “science or art”, you’re making an unfair assumption that nothing science-related can be art.

I think that *all* the engineering disciplines can be artful. Math proofs can be art. Architecture can be art. Physics can be art. In the same vein, programming can be art.

With that in mind, the question “is software science or art” seems to really ask, “is software significantly more artful than the other disciplines of science?” To that I’d have to answer no.