I'm not defending the original poster's use of analogy between introns and comments. Those are naive, simple analogies.
What I am responding to is your categorical statement that there are no legitimate analogies between CS and biology, and that's patently false.
I'm certainly not claiming - without evidence - that biological systems perform computation. I strongly suspect that biological systems carry out computation- quorum sensing being a canonical example- and in some sense, any sufficiently complex biological system can be considered an analog computer of some sort, with goal-seeking computational behavior.
One of my interests in some time has been building a digital circuit in DNA; one that can compute, using state, a taylor series approximation of an interesting constant, such as pi, using feedback circuits, error correction, and other "digital" approaches. None of this is impossible, it's just technology. People have already started doing this. That the underlying systems are capable of being turned into computing systems is just an outcome of the fact that biological systems are sufficiently complex that they can be used to instantiate simpler digital computing systems.
On the other hand, I think there are lots of CS people who apply blindly oversimplistic models to complex biological situations without understanding the biology, and that's what I was trying to protest against.
It's not clear to me what your link about the DNA code construction really means.
Consider instead:
1) people can encode terabytes of digital information in DNA and retrieve it using molecular techniques. To do so accurately enough requires coding.
2) Crick, who helped figure out many of the basic information coding mechanisms, widely acknowledged being influenced by the theory of information as proposed by Shannon.
3) both computer scientists and biologists frequently use the theory of control mechanisms (feedback, etc, also known as 'cybernetics' when I studied under David Huffman) to understand how their systems work, and engineer new ones.
4) you can make a computer out of DNA< and you can put computers into biological systems; they interact according to the laws of information theory, entropy, thermodynamics, etc.
The relationship between computing theory- as practiced today- and what biology has managed to spontaneously developed- are intimately related at the most basic levels of physics. Understanding that is KEY to being a productive biologist or computer scientist, and escpeially so for bioinformaticians.