All,

I have been through the HP3000-L archives and I can't find the message from
Gavin Scott refered too below.    I am very interested in this topic (I
gave a talk on the subject once).  Can anyone help me find the begining of
this thread?

  Cortlandt Wilson

Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]> wrote in article
<[log in to unmask]>...
| ----------
| > From: Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]>
| > T
| > Bruce wrote:
| > >I agree with Jim. Moreover, I have found that whenever someone waves
| > >their profession's code of ethics in my face, it's a sure sign that
| > >they can't be trusted -- especially when it's as filled with
| > >platitudes as this one is.
| >
| > I'm sick at home with the flu today, and I get to ramble all I want,
| > so let's see if we can get this controversial topic really going :-)
| >
| > The two versions of the ethics code that are being put forth seem
| > rather harmless to me.  They also seem tame to the point of being
| > almost completely useless.  You might as well say "Good programmers
| > will always do what is right" and leave it at that.
| >
| > There are reasons to be suspicious of this sort of thing as Bruce
| > alludes to.  Software "engineering" (a.k.a. Programming) is a field
| > which has virtually no "professional" status in academic or legal
| > terms as do all other fields with the term "engineering" in
| > them.  In fact, you'll get into trouble with the IEEE and most
| > State governments if you call your programmers "engineers" when
| > they don't have officially recognized engineering degrees.  The
| > term "Software Engineer" is a lot more nebulous as there is not
| > currently any academic/professional group that defines what the
| > requirements for such a branch of engineering would be, and so
| > far there have been few efforts to enact legislation to enforce
| > any sort of educational or other requirements for programmers.
| >
| >A lot snipped>>