in reply to
Re: Trained Perl professional or self-taught hack?
in thread Trained Perl professional or self-taught hack?
So, you object to the term professional. Can we all pretend, then, that the OP asked about "in-class education/training in the field of computer programming"? I think we all know what the OP meant, even if it wasn't formally precise.
To answer the OP's question myself - I have a degree in Electrical Engineering (I'm not sure why brian d foy singled out civil engineers - at least in Canada, all types of engineers need licensing, not just civil engineers). I took a computer minor, which amounted to 8 out of 41 courses being computer-programming-related (two from computer engineering, two from electrical engineering, the rest from computer science). And I have enough hubris to think I'm the best programmer on my team ;-) The rest of my team has either a comp sci degree or diploma each.
And I need to point out an inference I have from brian's post above: that programmers do not need to be licensed, nor should they need to be licensed. Perhaps this wasn't meant to be implied, but I inferred it anyway. I do think that there should be places in software where licensing should be mandatory. For starters, anything that any engineer, doctor, or other licensed professional uses in the pursuit of that profession (e.g., CAD, aeronautic computation, etc.) should have the stamp of a licensed professional in order to be marketted to that profession. That stamp would also prohibit any sort of EULA which tries to limit damages in the area of the licensing that is not in accord with that industry in general. Yes, this could drive the software prices way up. But then the quality of that software would have to be methodologically proven, which would help so many engineers, doctors, etc., that it would probably be worth it.
Authoring a spreadsheet or the like would be one thing. Writing rocket guidance or medical-research software is a whole other can of beans.