On 07/10/2011, at 1:16 PM, Kenta Murata wrote:
> (2011.10.07 01:50 ), David Graham wrote:
>> Is there a chance RBTree can be added to the standard library for =
Ruby 2.0?
> I agree with you if the library name is changed.
> The name of RBTree is too specific to its internal algorithm.
> If we adopt RBTree, we must change the name of the library after
> more better algorithms would be discovered.

I agree. Hash is not named after the hashing algorithm that's being =
used,
and Array is not named after its structure either.

For sorted structures, I've previously used the name Sequence. I think
this name would be suitable.

I also wish that Ruby had this container type available as a standard.

Clifford Heath.=