We don't even have an automatic grading system for code. You have to go in-person to a lab and demonstrate your code "working" while the TA asks questions.
It's actually a requirement that you put all of your code into a PDF and submit it. I have LaTeX macros that do it for me but most people literally attach 50 screenshots.
I don't see this getting better. CompArch is a required course (COE608) but the assignments are too hard so the school just gives out prewritten code to everyone. The hardest part is copying and pasting from the PDF and removing the smart quotes.
Also, the provided code is wrong. I found this out because I wrote everything from scratch and had to explain to the TA why my implementation of a shift instruction didn't match the correct one.
I think everyone involved views software as a cash grab.
Which CE program did you study at? I've worked with Waterloo, UBC, and UT ECE grads and they have similar levels of knowledge of programming fundamentals as their CS grads. I would be shocked if a first or second year BS ECE cannot use Git or some alternative VCS - that means there are more fundamental issues with your university's engineering curriculum.
> I can design a simple op-amp circuit and deploy to a Kubernetes cluster because Canada has a "Computer Engineering" degree that's a hybrid between CS/Electrical Engineering.
Same in the States, ECE and EECS programs tend to teach both fairly equally, and there are plenty of top programs with a strong reputation in this (Cal, MIT, CMU, UIUC, UT Austin, UW, UCSD, UCLA, GT, etc)
The issue I have noticed though is the decline of "CSE" programs - CS programs with an added CompArch or OS internals focus. CS programs are increasingly making OS internals and CompArch optional at the undergrad level, and it is having an impact on the pipeline for adjacent fields like Cybersecurity, Distributed Systems, Database Internals, etc.
I've harped about this skills gap multiple times on HN.