I've read a number of software patents and I would definitely not be able to reproduce the invention using just the information in the patent. Rather, I'd have to take the described functional claims and build something that does what it says. So they're almost fully functional.
The code should be included to uphold the spirit of the patent. A patent is a temporary monopoly granted in return for telling everyone how your invention works. If all you do is enumerate what your invention does in your claims, you haven't described how it works, and if the patent is granted, you've effectively only described any implementation of your idea, which is a huge problem.
Providing source code narrows the patent to AN implementation of an idea, and to experts in the field, actually explains in a common language (not legalese) exactly how it works.
Have a read of the brief the EFF put together for the PTO. It's somewhat readable, even for an engineer.
The code should be included to uphold the spirit of the patent. A patent is a temporary monopoly granted in return for telling everyone how your invention works. If all you do is enumerate what your invention does in your claims, you haven't described how it works, and if the patent is granted, you've effectively only described any implementation of your idea, which is a huge problem.
Providing source code narrows the patent to AN implementation of an idea, and to experts in the field, actually explains in a common language (not legalese) exactly how it works.
Have a read of the brief the EFF put together for the PTO. It's somewhat readable, even for an engineer.