> Imagine bridges or houses were built like that. Or your surgeon was trained like that.
While I don't disagree with you in general, this does feel a bit off.
By that logic you can call the field of music immature, and all of the arts. I think the difference is that its easy to experiment without high costs.
I genuinely think that if building bridges was cheap and quick, the fastest way to learn was to try...
I generally agree with your point on ease of experimentation, but if we insist on calling it software engineering, then maybe the field needs to adhere to engineering principles, as the GP highlighted.
I believe part of engineering isn’t over-engineering for the task at hand as well. If the costs of a “failure” are low/zero then the right thing can be to move quickly expecting some problems.
I think the field could get better at knowing when costs are low (eg sometimes scalability, cheaper to change a database choice than rebuild a bridge) and where the costs are sometimes very high (eg security).
Notice OP says "software design". Design is still an art, even in mechanical engineering.
Engineering applies to looking at a design and proving something about it.
The term "design" is ambiguous here.
When design is a process to build something pleasing (like in music or painting), then yes, it's an art, and you can rightfully have different opinions about outcomes, sometimes diametrically opposed opinions, which is all not just fine and accepted but inherent in the field and a required ingredient.
When design is about building something functional, then it's part of engineering. You can objectively measure whether it does satisfy the requirements. That's where serious engineering disciplines are and where software engineering needs to aim for if it wants to keep engineering in its title without getting laughed at. As long as programmers consider themselves part artists, that's hard to achieve, but as the field matures, there is hope.
Note that some fields are trying to be both. For example architecture. There it's solved by making a more or less clear distinction between the pleasing art part (that's what the architect does) and the functional engineering part (structural engineer). Both roles are not being conflated. In software, we still do that.