I suppose one should be able to patent a kludge no matter how well it functions.When the per-compononent cost of a circuit approaches zero, any improvement in performance is an improvement.
I think if you look around at the world you will see such things a digital voltmeters at Radio Shack. They replace much simpler analog designs without providing much usable improvement in accuracy or reliability (at least not for the typical Radio Shack customer). This observation could be repeated thousands of times among the everyday objects we live with. Labeling an object with a pejorative name is no more usefull that labeling a person with a pejorative name.
In alle this discussion, you have failed to address the only important point being argued -- that is the the circuits designed by the computer program have features that could that could not be designed by the people who wrote the program.
that is the the circuits designed by the computer program have features that could that could not be designed by the people who wrote the program.No, that has been alleged about those that designed original circuits. It is most readily apparent that the people who wrote the program do not know how the object it produced works. At the moment we have, on this thread, no evidence of the performance of the evolved circuit in question(cubic function generator).
As to perjorative terms, kludge( or kluge if you prefer) is a spot on description of the evolved circuit.
kludge or kluge 
( P ) Pronunciation Key (kl
j)
n. Slang
- A system, especially a computer system, that is constituted of poorly matched elements or of elements originally intended for other applications.
- A clumsy or inelegant solution to a problem.
That purple transistor in the evolved circuit is a perfect example of inelegant and poorly matched.