Tangent: I've been reading about Christopher Alexander's work, particularly his keynote for the 1996 OOPSLA conference. Alexander introduced the idea of patter

Tangent: I've been reading about Christopher Alexander's work, particularly his keynote for the 1996 OOPSLA conference. Alexander introduced the idea of pattern languages to architecture in the 70s, and it has influenced computer science. However, reading further, it doesn't look like Alexander's deeper work ever caught on: his follow up work (in The Nature of Order) speaks about things that makes architecture more like a gardener. Alexander talked about it in that OOPSLA keynote, how he and his collaborators discovered pattern languages that guarantees cohesive design. By iterating it, a design would emerge that is in harmony within context. He likens it that use of pattern languages to DNA. (He then found 15 'deep patterns' in which all pattern languages that guarantee cohesiveness in design shares ...) I understood this to mean, the architecture is in the DNA, the "deep patterns", while at the same time, the design are grown like a gardener. At that point, there is no dichotomy of architect vs. gardener. Ironic, I think, one of the most influential architects and philosopher was speaking on things that got co-opted into reaffirming that dichotomy. "Patterns" came to be used as a way of creating rigid, dead designs. I don't know of many people practicing this in fullness in either building architecture or software architecture.