9-4c1 If you can't write about it, you can't code it. If you can't program it, you don't understand it.

When you invert this, it means writing about any subject helps you understand better. You’ll be able to code better as you write about it. You will understand better as you code the program. And LLMs made that transition from writing to coding easier.

Repeat: write → code → read → rewrite

Next:

• 9-4c2 ‘Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.’ ‘Design to express algorithms, and only incidentally tell machines how to execute them.‘

Related Notes:

• 2-1a0aa Applied Occam’s razor - ‘If you can’t program it, you don’t understand it. If you can’t write about it, you can’t code it.‘
• 9-4e2b SaaS first ⇒ code second ⇒ hire last

---

Does that mean if an agent (e.g., Claude) can program it, that’s the same understanding? I don’t think so. A program is just an output. Understanding is what sources the program.

Related:

• 2-1a4c We don’t know how we create knowledge yet, but that doesn’t mean we can’t
• 5-2 What counts cannot be counted
• 10-2g1f3 We can only figure out what they know by what they do (‘performance’), because we can never directly study what people know (‘competence’). To assert that we can is a common error in thinking.