I never said that. I said that code reuse is not a sign of intelligence ipso facto, contrary to what you asserted. Evolution versus design is a false dichotomy. There are other plausible mechanisms that can create speciation (such as complexification in automata systems). System dynamics offers a number of possibilities, so-called "evolution" is just one possible mechanism described, and one fixated on because some famous dude wrote a book on it many years ago. In fact, it rather annoys me that people remain stubbornly ignorant about the fact that evolution is only one of a myriad of plausible explanations for speciation that come out of systems theory.
If I say "does not imply design", it does not equal "implies evolution". It could be any one of a number equally plausible mechanisms. As I said, evolution versus design is a false dichotomy, mostly due to ignorance and an unhealthy fixation on evolution that exists for historical reasons. No one has, for example, even attempted to refute molecular automata theories, which are actually increasingly popular in many biological circles. I'm not sure what the creationists would do if all the evolutionists switched teams to automata theory.
I think you are confusing "evolution" with the Darwinian model of random mutation and natural selection. There are quite a number of acceptable non-Darwinian evolutionary paradigms, like self-organization, emergence, and symbiosis. They are not mutually exclusive. And they all fall under the umbrella of evolution in biology.