Constrained by contracts to make the building exactly like the drawing

"...if the builder builds according to a detailed drawing, and is constrained by his contract to make the building exactly like the drawing, he then makes the detail identical, to follow the drawing-and in the actual building this becomes dead and artificial. "

This reads exactly like an argument against trying to be “pixel perfect” and taking a Figma design too literally. Instead, Alexander argues that builders (engineers) need to build the design using the same pattern language that created it. A consequence of this is that you will always get a slightly different result each time you apply the language, but that’s exactly the point. If the patterns and the language are good, the result will always be good. They may not match what’s in Figma, but they will match the intent of the design.

This goes against just about every “best practice” today. We simply have no mental model for patterns like this. The best “patterns” are at best just big components.