Editing Software engineering (section)

=== Suitability ===

Individual commentators have disagreed sharply on how to define ''software engineering'' or its legitimacy as an engineering discipline. [[David Parnas]] has said that software engineering is, in fact, a form of engineering.<ref>{{cite journal | last = Parnas| first = David L.| author-link = David Parnas| year = 1998| title = Software Engineering Programmes are not Computer Science Programmes| journal = Annals of Software Engineering| volume = 6| pages = 19–37| doi = 10.1023/A:1018949113292| s2cid = 35786237| url=http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/parnas98software.html}}, p. 19: "Rather than treat software engineering as a subfield of computer science, I treat it as an element of the set, {Civil Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Electrical Engineering,....}."</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last = Parnas| first = David L.| year = 1998| title = Software Engineering Programmes are not Computer Science Programmes| journal = Annals of Software Engineering| volume = 6
| pages = 19–37| doi = 10.1023/A:1018949113292| s2cid = 35786237| url=http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/parnas98software.html}}, p. 20: "This paper argues that the introduction of accredited professional programs in software engineering, programmes that are modelled on programmes in traditional engineering disciplines will help to increase both the quality and quantity of graduates who are well prepared, by their education, to develop trustworthy software products."
</ref> [[Steve McConnell]] has said that it is not, but that it should be.<ref>{{cite book| last = McConnell| first = Steve| author-link = Steve McConnell| date = August 2003| title = Professional Software Development: Shorter Schedules, Better Projects, Superior Products, Enhanced Careers| publisher = Addison-Wesley| location = Boston, MA| isbn = 0-321-19367-9| url-access = registration| url = https://archive.org/details/professionalsoft00mcco_0}}, p. 39: "In my opinion, the answer to that question is clear: Professional software development should be engineering. Is it? No. But should it be? Unquestionably, yes. "</ref> [[Donald Knuth]] has said that programming is an art and a science.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Knuth | first=Donald| author-link=Donald Knuth |year = 1974| title= Computer Programming as an Art | journal = Communications of the ACM | volume = 17 | issue = 12 | pages = 667–673 | url=http://disciplinas.lia.ufc.br/matdis061/arquivos/knuth-turingaward.pdf | doi=10.1145/361604.361612| s2cid=207685720| doi-access=free }}Transcript of the 1974 [[Turing Award]] lecture.</ref> [[Edsger W. Dijkstra]] claimed that the terms ''software engineering'' and ''software engineer'' have been misused in the United States.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD11xx/EWD1165.html| title = There is still a war going on (manuscript Austin, 3 December 1993)| access-date = February 17, 2007 | last = Dijkstra | first = Edsger W| author-link = Edsger Dijkstra| author2=transcribed by Mario Béland | orig-year = First published December 3, 1993| date = November 23, 2004| work = E. W. Dijkstra Archive| publisher = The University of Texas at Austin, Department of Computer Sciences| quote = When the term was coined in 1968 by F.L. Bauer of the Technological University of Munich, I welcomed it. [. . .] I interpreted the introduction of the term "software engineering" as an apt reflection of the fact that the design of software systems was an activity par excellence for the mathematical engineer. [. . .]. As soon the term arrived in the USA, it was relieved of all its technical content. It had to be so for in its original meaning it was totally unacceptable [. . .] In the meantime, software engineering has become an almost empty term, as was nicely demonstrated by Data General who overnight promoted all its programmers to the exalted rank of "software engineer"! }}</ref>