I like Manolo Naon's art, and I am quite fond of creative coding, but something that strikes me when seeing this article comparing his works to Kandinsky, Ernst et. al is that his works are always harmonious, a single idea in action, whereas all these classic artists have conflicts and discord in their works.

They deliberately avoided doing things that were simply decorative or pleasant. (Probably they were avoiding accusations of just making couch and wallpaper patterns)

There is more to experience then just one decorative process at work.

You can feel the artist's presence and discord in the images. Look at the Max Ernst works and ask yourself why he left it imperfect, fading away like dreams or unconscious processes.

Look at the Kandinskys. There is far more information (different design processes juxtaposed), and even after looking at it for a while you still have to wonder how it is balanced and yet there's barely any repetition.

Manolo is always explicit and readable. There is a lack of mystery. Once you've examined the image then you like it, but nothing stirs in the depths.

But he's young, I like the direction, and he will definitely keep developing.