Evolution is most likely a part of intelligent design

In nature, yes; since nature will take care of the rest. For artificial life, however, you do need to program in selective death, or you'll run out of memory and crash the universe.Oh, and Para's glass example was a good one. To make a computer model of a falling glass that comes anywhere near to full complexity would take billions of lines of code. However, anything in reality that uses a falling and breaking glass doesn't need to include those billions of lines. All you need to do is let it go, and the universe makes sure that it does a 100%-complexity fall-and-shatter.Edited by DominionSeraph, : No reason given.

Which is exactly the point. Everything needs to be coded for because it can't cheat off reality.
You can't code for a glass balanced precariously on the edge of a table, then code for a person sweeping up glass shards, and expect the universe to fill in the bits between. It won't do that, so you can't use that as a shortcut.
This is not the case for a code that intersects with the universe. With one of those, you can just hand things off, let the universe do its thang, and then come back in.It's like:

__     _________________________________     ______
  |   |                                 |    |
  ----                                  -----
A B   C                                 D    E     F

The high is the universe's part, and the low is the code's.So, we come in at point (A), which is the universe just doing its thing. At (B) we switch over to the code. The code then dictates what happens up to (C), where it hands things back off to the universe. The universe then ticks along until point (D), where the code takes over again. We hand things back off to the universe at (E), which then brings us to (F).So, we've gotten from point A to point F, but the code only tells us how to get from B to C and from D to E.
Rather efficient.