From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:27117 comp.lang.ada:3518 alt.cobol:116 comp.software-eng:3265 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!wang!comm.wang.com!lws From: lws@comm.WANG.COM (Lyle Seaman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada,alt.cobol,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Ted Holden's disinformation Message-ID: <1990Mar21.232702.20713@comm.WANG.COM> Date: 21 Mar 90 23:27:02 GMT References: <19450@grebyn.com> <8308@hubcap.clemson.edu> Distribution: usa Organization: Wang Labs, Platform Comms. List-Id: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) writes: > counterpart. This is despite the fact that STANFINS-R had to take > raw COBOL programmers and train them to be Ada Software Engineers, This is interesting. Would I be stepping into another endless and static debate if I wondered why the noun here changed from "programmers" (with a lower case 'p') to "Software Engineers" with uppercase letters? In my experience, the terms programmer and software engineer conjure up two entirely different worlds of practice. I can't imagine training a programmer to be a software engineer (much less a Software Engineer) in anything like the amount of time spent of STANFINS-R. I think this is a shameful attempt to further one's argument by using subtly loaded language distinct from the issue directly at hand. -- Lyle Wang lws@comm.wang.com 508 967 2322 Lowell, MA, USA uunet!comm.wang.com!lws