The sad truth is, average and below-average developers actually need considerable training to learn a new programming language. They can't just look at the specs and read some tutorials to get an understanding of the conceptual and syntactical differences and then start hacking. They need to be trained.
Also, to counter your 'Autocad engineer' example, commercial airline pilots can be described as a 'Boeing 747 pilot' or an 'Airbus A318' pilot. You need certification to fly a specific model and can't just hop in and start flying a different model.
> commercial airline pilots can be described as a 'Boeing 747 pilot' or an 'Airbus A318' pilot.
I don't think that's a good analogy.
Pilots are operators, not creators. What they do is pretty much defined by what devices they use to do it.
Engineers, in contrast, use tools to create new things, and are defined by what kinds of things they create (e.g. civil infrastructure, electrical systems, computer architecture), not what tools they use to create them.
Actually, none of the private or commercial pilots I've known have ever referred to themselves that way.
Granted, my sample size is limited, but I think that every one of them would be as annoyed at being referred to as an <aircraft x> Pilot as I am at being referred to as a <language x> Programmer.
Also, to counter your 'Autocad engineer' example, commercial airline pilots can be described as a 'Boeing 747 pilot' or an 'Airbus A318' pilot. You need certification to fly a specific model and can't just hop in and start flying a different model.