About IEEE

I'm having a course about Software Engineering.
In this course, I have a presentation about IEEE, in which I should
introduce software engineering in IEEE.
Is there any website or homepage introduce this part?
or can anyone tell me what types of part IEEE is constitute of in
software engineering(I've heard IEEE 12207 is software life cycle and
IEEE 15504 is software process improvement)?

Thanks.

chaehorim
Chongnam National University.
daejeon. south korea.

"chaehorim" <chaehorim@hanmail.net> wrote in message
news:1116054033.854083.150960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I'm having a course about Software Engineering.
> In this course, I have a presentation about IEEE, in which I should
> introduce software engineering in IEEE.
> Is there any website or homepage introduce this part?
> or can anyone tell me what types of part IEEE is constitute of in
> software engineering(I've heard IEEE 12207 is software life cycle and
> IEEE 15504 is software process improvement)?
>
The big question is whether software engineering is even a valid
concept.    In the engieering world, we deal with physical space
and can design according the constraints imposed by nature.

The software developer is not constrained by nature.   Gravity is
a non-issue.  Friction is a non-issue.   etc.  etc. etc.

So much of what passes for engineering, in software practice is
simply following some kind of process.  In designing a bridge, the
civil engineer can use knowledge about the physical properties of
concrete (compression strength) or those of the steel reinforcing
rods (tensile strength) and combine them into a predictable design.
This is engineering.   Most software developers have not concept
of what they mean by engineering.

I wonder if you professor has a clear idea of what he means when
he takes on the task of teaching software engineering.

Richard Riehle

> I wonder if you professor has a clear idea of what he means when
> he takes on the task of teaching software engineering.

Heh--keep fighting the good fight, Richard...

For what it's worth, I'm a member of IEEE's computer society, and I
agree with Richard that the term "engineering" is not exactly a good
fit because of the reasons he submits.  From what I can tell, the
IEEE's mission is sort of "soft engineering"--defect management,
schedule and resource predictability, proper estimates of
size/space/calendar time, etc. (more project management issues in many
ways) and less what most engineers come to think of as engineering
(these components perform in these fashions, so to get the desired
levels of performance we must choose these components and arrange them
in this fashion).

That doesn't mean the IEEE's goals aren't laudable (who doesn't want
better estimates of project size/effort, higher quality software,
etc?), but it's just not what most engineers think of as engineering.
There are some analogues (such as books on algorithms telling you
their relative performance in different situations so you can choose
the right one for the job, etc), just that their emphasis is on the
project management side rather than the product design side, or at
least that's the impression I've gotten.

They are really trying to work toward the ideal of a licensed software
professional, akin to the licensing of engineers.  To that end they
have developed a "certified software engineering professional"
program, a professional code of ethics, and a tome entitled the
"Software Engineering Body of Knowledge" (swebok) which is actually
pretty contentious since no one can really agree what ought to be in
there.

In short, it's all a little confusing.  You can poke around the IEEE
Computer Society's homepage at www.computer.org, and get many of the
documents I mentioned above (code of ethics, swebok, etc) as well as a
pretty good idea of what they're about.  You may want to pick up Steve
McConnell's "After the Gold Rush" for another perspective on
establishing a software engineering profession (Steve is an icon in
software development literature and editor of IEEE Software magazine).

That's at least a place to get started.  I think the IEEE's goals here
are worthwhile, but represent one of many views of software
development, and they are really good to know about as another tool in
your arsenal.

-->VPutz

"chaehorim" wrote in message
news:1116054033.854083.150960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I'm having a course about Software Engineering.
> In this course, I have a presentation about IEEE, in which I
> should introduce software engineering in IEEE.
> Is there any website or homepage introduce this part?
> or can anyone tell me what types of part IEEE is constitute of
> in software engineering(I've heard IEEE 12207 is software life
> cycle and IEEE 15504 is software process improvement)?

You can get IEEE's Guide to the Software Engineering Body
of Knowledge (SWEBOK) at:

http://www.swebok.org/ironman/pdf/SWEBOK_Guide_2004.pdf

> Thanks.

You are welcome.

--
Mail sent to this email address is deleted unread
on the server. Please send replies to the newsgroup.

<vputz@nyx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd9joht.e62.vputz@phineas.wingedyak.com... 
>
> Heh--keep fighting the good fight, Richard...
>
> For what it's worth, I'm a member of IEEE's computer society,
> and I agree with Richard that the term "engineering" is not
> exactly a good fit because of the reasons he submits.  From
> what I can tell, the IEEE's mission is sort of "soft
> engineering"--defect management, schedule and resource
> predictability, proper estimates of size/space/calendar time,
> etc. (more project management issues in many ways) and less
> what most engineers come to think of as engineering (these
> components perform in these fashions, so to get the desired
> levels of performance we must choose these components and
> arrange them in this fashion).
>
> That doesn't mean the IEEE's goals aren't laudable (who doesn't
> want better estimates of project size/effort, higher quality
> software, etc?), but it's just not what most engineers think of
> as engineering. There are some analogues (such as books on
> algorithms telling you their relative performance in different
> situations so you can choose the right one for the job, etc),
> just that their emphasis is on the project management side
> rather than the product design side, or at least that's the
> impression I've gotten.
>
> They are really trying to work toward the ideal of a licensed
> software professional, akin to the licensing of engineers.  To
> that end they have developed a "certified software engineering
> professional" program, a professional code of ethics, and a
> tome entitled the "Software Engineering Body of Knowledge"
> (swebok) which is actually pretty contentious since no one can
> really agree what ought to be in there.
>
> In short, it's all a little confusing.  You can poke around
> the IEEE Computer Society's homepage at www.computer.org, and
> get many of the documents I mentioned above (code of ethics,
> swebok, etc) as well as a pretty good idea of what they're
> about.  You may want to pick up Steve McConnell's "After the
> Gold Rush" for another perspective on establishing a software
> engineering profession (Steve is an icon in software
> development literature and editor of IEEE Software magazine).
>
> That's at least a place to get started.  I think the IEEE's
> goals here are worthwhile, but represent one of many views of
> software development, and they are really good to know about
> as another tool in your arsenal.
>
> -->VPutz

"Engineering" (in the context of applied science,
engineering science, technology):

"The discipline dealing with the art or science of
applying scientific knowledge to practical problems."

IEEE's case rests!

--
Mail sent to this email address is deleted unread
on the server. Please send replies to the newsgroup.

"Nameless" wrote in message
news:w%zme.158$vS6.25@amstwist00...
> <vputz@nyx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd9joht.e62.vputz@phineas.wingedyak.com... 
[snipped]
>
> "Engineering" (in the context of applied science,
> engineering science, technology):
>
>    "The discipline dealing with the art or science of
>    applying scientific knowledge to practical problems."
>
> IEEE's case rests!

The IEEE rests its case.

(Perhaps this is more English-like?)

--
Mail sent to this email address is deleted unread
on the server. Please send replies to the newsgroup.

quote:
The software developer is not constrained by nature.   Gravity is a non-issue.  Fric
tion is a non-issue.   etc.  etc. etc.

I guess the same could be said about quantumn physics? They don't follow the
 same laws as traditional physics.

Software engineering may not "really" be engineering in the strictest sense,
 but they are part of the IEEE, which is an organization of engineers. My ho
pe is that more computer scientists will start getting involved with some of
 the more complex issues in regards to computer technology today - such as n
anotechnology, quantum computing, quantum cryptography.

Anyway, to the original post...
quote:
...introduce software engineering in IEEE...

You may be able to find stuff on these other IEEE sites...

IEEE Technical Council on Software Engineering...
http://www.tcse.org/

(part of the tcse website)Software Engineering info center newest events...
http://www.tcse.org/events_newest.php

IEEE software engineering standards zone...
http://standards.ieee.org/software/

"Nameless" <news.mail@chello.no> wrote in message
news:nAGme.177$vS6.61@amstwist00...
> "Engineering" (in the context of applied science,
> engineering science, technology):
>
>    "The discipline dealing with the art or science of
>    applying scientific knowledge to practical problems."
>
> The IEEE rests its case.
>
So, a surgeon engaged in a removal of an appendix is engaged
in engineering.   A criminalist, doing forensic analysis on a murder
victim is doing engineering.    A farmer, measuing out the precise
amount of fertilizer, according the reported science is doing
engineering.   A machinist, turning the bolts for a given nut with
known number of threads and diameter is an engineer.

According to that, non-rigorous definition, any number of activities
could be classified as engineering.   I don't think that is the case.

So, what definition of engineering can you give that encompasses
some aspect of software practice?   Is writing a program, engineering?
Is designing a UML class diagram engineering?   Where is the engineering
in software engineering?

Richard Riehle

adaworks wrote:
 
> So, a surgeon engaged in a removal of an appendix is engaged
> in engineering.   A criminalist, doing forensic analysis on a murder
> victim is doing engineering.    A farmer, measuing out the precise
> amount of fertilizer, according the reported science is doing
> engineering.   A machinist, turning the bolts for a given nut with
> known number of threads and diameter is an engineer.

Those people are following recipes. Converting scientific abstractions into
such recipes is engineering.

> So, what definition of engineering can you give that encompasses
> some aspect of software practice?   Is writing a program, engineering?
> Is designing a UML class diagram engineering?   Where is the engineering
> in software engineering?

Source code is a recipe.

--
Phlip
[url]http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZLand[/url]