I have a degree in both Computer Science and Civil Engineering and I disagree with the analogy of the Product Manager writing the feature likened to them welding. Writing a feature can be really complex, and or simple depending on the requirements, however the analogy of welding misses the importance of domain and technical knowledge required in implementation.
Writing a feature is more like a Project Engineer managing and overseeing human resources in order to realise the design. Project Engineers understand the design and may even partake in in-situ tests, like concrete slump testing to test if the concrete mix is acceptable. And yes, Project Engineers are Civil Engineers who specialise in construction. So if the analogy needs to hold for this article, Managers too need experience and formal education in Software, but that is not acknowledged in this article.
I expect it will be popular to dogpile on this article and point out how it's wrong in all sort of ways. I don't mean to do this and appreciate the writing, but a core difference is that software engineering always strives to avoid catering to the idiosyncrasies of the time and place while civil engineering is virtually all about the quirks of the site.
Meh, 2026 edition of "developers vs coders vs engineers". It wasn't interesting before, it isn't now. People will do development at varying depths and breadths depending on their interest, role, project, and skill. For some reason, some people seem obsessed with this topic. "Coders don't care about CS fundamentals!", "engineers apply rigor"! Snore
> The PMs writing features? That’s the welding. And there’s nothing wrong with it. But it only works if the bridge is designed right.
>
> The profession is splitting. The mistake would be pretending it isn’t happening
I'm tired of reading AI blog-posts. Write in your own words, please.
"CS is the welding. SE is the structural engineering."
No. Computer Science (CS) is the basis. It's the fundamentals underneath Software Engineering (SE).
The author is trying to convey that current CS education is not enough to create a good Software Engineer, which is true. But SE is a specialization and CS is a broad overview of the core components of a computing education.
If you want to create a comparison to Civil Engineering (CE), this isn't it. CS to SE is more like the underlying physics that support the specifics of Structural Engineering.
A more apt comparison is that the low-level programmer who takes a spec and just implements it is the "welding"; this would be that fresh hire out of college in their first position.
I have a degree in both Computer Science and Civil Engineering and I disagree with the analogy of the Product Manager writing the feature likened to them welding. Writing a feature can be really complex, and or simple depending on the requirements, however the analogy of welding misses the importance of domain and technical knowledge required in implementation.
Writing a feature is more like a Project Engineer managing and overseeing human resources in order to realise the design. Project Engineers understand the design and may even partake in in-situ tests, like concrete slump testing to test if the concrete mix is acceptable. And yes, Project Engineers are Civil Engineers who specialise in construction. So if the analogy needs to hold for this article, Managers too need experience and formal education in Software, but that is not acknowledged in this article.
I expect it will be popular to dogpile on this article and point out how it's wrong in all sort of ways. I don't mean to do this and appreciate the writing, but a core difference is that software engineering always strives to avoid catering to the idiosyncrasies of the time and place while civil engineering is virtually all about the quirks of the site.
I think this results in quite different cultures.
Meh, 2026 edition of "developers vs coders vs engineers". It wasn't interesting before, it isn't now. People will do development at varying depths and breadths depending on their interest, role, project, and skill. For some reason, some people seem obsessed with this topic. "Coders don't care about CS fundamentals!", "engineers apply rigor"! Snore
> The PMs writing features? That’s the welding. And there’s nothing wrong with it. But it only works if the bridge is designed right. > > The profession is splitting. The mistake would be pretending it isn’t happening
I'm tired of reading AI blog-posts. Write in your own words, please.
"CS is the welding. SE is the structural engineering."
No. Computer Science (CS) is the basis. It's the fundamentals underneath Software Engineering (SE).
The author is trying to convey that current CS education is not enough to create a good Software Engineer, which is true. But SE is a specialization and CS is a broad overview of the core components of a computing education.
If you want to create a comparison to Civil Engineering (CE), this isn't it. CS to SE is more like the underlying physics that support the specifics of Structural Engineering.
A more apt comparison is that the low-level programmer who takes a spec and just implements it is the "welding"; this would be that fresh hire out of college in their first position.
> Project managers are writing code
I'm the project manager who is responsible for writing the code stopping airplanes from hitting other objects.
It's been a rough couple years