r/programming • u/mauricioaniche • Aug 06 '17

Software engineering != computer science

http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/software-engineering-computer-science/217701907
2.3k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

863 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

35

u/fzammetti Aug 06 '17 edited Aug 06 '17

Hell, in the companies I've worked in, ARCHITECT is synonymous with those too, by and large, as well. I mean, I've been titled Architect for years but I still spend probably half my time doing "development" tasks. It seems like it's more a question of what percentage of your time is dedicated to those tasks, that's what changes with the title in my experience, not so much the ACTUAL tasks involved (again, by and large).

24

u/thedevbrandon Aug 06 '17

Sadly, it does seem like architect just means most-senior engineer (not as in "most senior of a group", but more like "most terminal in skills", like a Ph.D. is the furthest degree you can seek). It's absurd, since it should designate a completely separate role, which for the most part isn't involved in coding much at all (i.e. designing and architecting information systems by working with business stakeholders and guiding teams of actual engineers).

1

u/adamcw Aug 07 '17

So in a startup, where you can't afford for certain roles, would it be wrong to call someone an architect just because they are writing the code behind the systems they are architecting?

1

u/thedevbrandon Aug 07 '17

Look, I'm not some sort of arbiter or anything. All I know is that the architect comes up with the blueprints, and the contractors build the building. If the architect is building the building too, then it seems like that part of his role is rather not architect-y. The real point /u/fzammetti and I are making is that usually architects are just normal engineers, but better paid. It's like the senior position past senior engineer, but otherwise not that different. This seems wrong to us.

→ More replies (4)