One major proctored exam scales a lot better than every company for themselves reinventing an almost proctored exam.
https://engineers.texas.gov/downloads/ncees_PESoftware_2013....
Certainly what I see in the PE today seems like a good starting base. Having some idea of Big O complexity can be a great place to start when working with algorithms, and certainly from my perspective I'd rather have an engineer with a solid idea of Big O complexity trade-off issues than a bunch of rote memorized implementations of classic algorithms.
Also, don't forget that a lot of discrete math and algorithms bubbled up into the Fundamentals of Engineering test that is the prerequisite of the PE test:
https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/FE-Ele-CBT-specs.pdf
Which isn't to say that the PE can't be improved for Software Engineering to better meet industry needs, but certainly the current PE still stands as a good starting point that the industry could try to hone to a better tool if they wanted.
No, this is a made-up difficulty, caused by the fact that programmers think there’s a silver bullet solution to evaluating competency in an “objective” manner.
My girlfriend has just graduated college with an Accounting degree.
> There's nothing like it for programmers.
What exactly is the difference between a BA (Accounting), and a BSc (Computing) in terms of validation?
Now if you want to talk CPA? Sure, but the equivalent of that would be a Software Engineering (similar to PE/CE/ME).
Apples and oranges.