[Lazlo_Nibble]

In many engineering disciplines you're legally forbidden from self-applying the title of "engineer" -- you have to be licensed and take formal legal responsibility for the quality of your work. That level of discipline and rigor is what most people are referring to when they distinguish between "software engineers" and "real" engineers.

[_delirium]

It's not nearly that strict. You can't use the title "Professional Engineer" without licensing, but non-licensed engineers can and usually do use the term "engineer", or derivatives like "chemical engineer" on their business cards and resumes. It's the norm in firms with a lot of engineers (like, say, Exxon) that most of the people whose job title includes the word "engineer" are not PEs. It doesn't even really give you any benefit to be a PE in the corporate context, because everything you're doing is on behalf of the corporation anyway; you're not an independent contractor providing services that you have to legally stand behind, but an employee doing work for hire.

edit: This is true for the U.S. anyway. I believe some other countries are more strict on who may call themselves an engineer.

[jedberg]

So would you be ok with calling people software engineers if they had to take a test to get a license and then be responsible for failures of their code in the future?

[Lazlo_Nibble]

I'm not advocating a position either way. I'm explaining why people make the distinction.