I am not sure if one should be taking a lesson away from here. Sure, a programmer was able to write software on paper with incredible clarity but in my opinion,

I am not sure if one should be taking a lesson away from here. Sure, a programmer was able to write software on paper with incredible clarity but in my opinion, that approach is counter-productive than useful in most contexts. Yes, it's unavoidable in certain cases (space rovers, critical health-related equipment), but in most cases, it's not. Getting something on the screen is useful. It's motivating. It helps to expose the limits of the approach taken. The scope of the project becomes much clearer when have written a chunk of code. I have rarely felt that I should have spent more time dabbling with pen and paper, than firing up my text editor. After all, mistakes can always be corrected. With the rising complexity of software, and of the whole ecosystem itself, does it make sense to know all the edge cases you're going to stumble upon beforehand? Not to mention that requirements can themselves change. And what about processes like code-reviews? You're not the only person working on the software. I am hard-pressed to say that seeking an extreme level of clarity isn't a great use of time.