[consumer451]

> I mean it has to, for something rigorously proven, right?

I have been thinking about this recently. What are the most rigorous "software actual engineering" fields, or projects?

Autopilot systems in airliners came to mind. Not just autopilot, but FADEC, and other flight control systems. Medical devices? ... Or, are all those teams just winging it as well?

[HeyLaughingBoy]

Interesting question. Adherence to formal standards might be a good proxy for this, perhaps. Dunno. Just the first thing that comes to mind.

I am in Medical Devices software. Our main compliance requirements are 21CFR and IEC-62304. I know Automotive has MISRA (more coding guidelines than development process, but still) and a handful of other standards. Aviation follows DO-178x, and so on...

[consumer451]

> Adherence to formal standards might be a good proxy for this

A lifetime ago, right out of high school, I was a sort of sysadmin at a decent sized civil and structural engineering firm. I learned a lot about the profession of engineering there. Adhering to standards does indeed seem like a really good proxy.

[nyarlathotep_]

Indeed--the "invisible stuff" ABS/ECU/electronic throttle etc in cars, pacemakers, software in airliners. I imagine things that run on RTOSes fall in this category.

There's a whole world of software stuff that just isn't discussed in public forums/places where you'd usually find information on the internet, unfortunately.