Maybe it's just me, but I would expect a spacewalk to be performed by a strict procedure, (someone telling each step over the intercom or a digital checklist attached to the sleeve of the astronaut's suit), comparable to how surgeons work: well planned and prepared, the placement of the toolbox and its tools included in the planning (open attached toolbag, attach needed tool to suit, detach said tool from toolbag (with double straps, like mountain climbers do), use tool, etc.). Am I getting something fundamentally wrong about spacewalking as to how this would be impossible?

I can't believe that was just given a 3 interesting. As if the spaceshuttle can just go fly around anywhere. As if the spaceshuttle has even enough fuel for that. Even with enough fuel, as if the fuel usage for retrieval would cost less than 100K. As if the risk of such operation wouldn't be tremendous. Etcetera. Who gives mod-points these days? A bunch of 7-year olds?

Here's a quote for you sir: "Frankly, I'm suspicious of anyone who has a strong opinion on a complicated issue." - Scott Adams

Simple? Yeah, right.

Here's one word: Trust! Obama is clearly someone who has gained the trust of the world, or to say the least, far more trust than Bush has. You can already see this immediately in the exchange rate of the dollar vs euro to name one. There will be a positive effect that will spread out. I also suspect that aggression against American troops will decline because of this, which means fewer troops will be needed, which means lower tax expenses, etc. In short: the fact that the American people chose Obama is a major boost for the karma of all America that will be felt on every level, be it diplomatic relations, business, international trade... Investors all over the world believe America is in good hands. And he's not even started ruling!

I should react to that. The stl string is one string implementation that uses the "string as array of characters" paradigm so that the algortihm template functions can be used with them. Other languages (C#, Java) use the "copy-on-write" paradigm (Google that up, I won't explain the difference here). The latter implementation is more memory and cpu-friendly in 90% of the cases where string operations are needed, so I prefer it above the stl implementation, therefore I DID write my own string class. (If ever I need to use stl algorithms on them, I convert my string into an stl string and afterwards back to my string class. This gives me additional deep copies, but hey, that's what the stl implementation does ALL the time with strings, whereas the other implementation only when the string changes, so there is your benefit.) Second thing (and even more important), the copy-on-write string is thread-safe, the stl not.

Now how does this example adhere to this discussion? Sometimes, the existing code just doesn't float your boat. In such case, it makes sense to look for an alternative and often, writing it yourself can be a good choice as well. What is important when writing it yourself is to use class names and method names (and behaviour) that are well-established. In the case of my own string class, I used the method names of the C# string class, so my documentation is already written. Of course, you won't catch me re-writing things like the quicksort algorithm.

Saying that someone who writes this or that class from scratch is incompetent is a dangerous statement that might somehow boomerang back in your face. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Rule: listen to what the writer has to say for himself (or read his documentation), you might learn something, you might teach something. Or both.