Perhaps near-perfection was a poor choice of language. My point was that a software architect could design a complete solution without writing any code, and be

Perhaps near-perfection was a poor choice of language. My point was that a software architect could design a complete solution without writing any code, and be very confident that it will work as required when implemented. In many organisations waterfall is too expensive/slow, and often an early iteration is more important than a robust implementation. But the waterfall methodology is still the only option for mission-critical applications. And these systems are best designed by experienced software architects before any code gets written. I'm not saying that the architect's involvement should end after design. They are critical to communicating the design to anyone involved with the implementation phase.