> > Was there a reason for choosing different terminology then FreeBSD
> > for this?
> 
> I for one would say that the "FreeBSD terminology" for this was ...
> bad, being both uglier and harder to understand than a better name
> would be.

Give me a *break* Chris.  What Charles did was NIH, pure and simple.

You've trying to tell me that 'SIMPLEQ' is somehow more inherenty
beautiful and understandable as a single-linked list than SLIST and
STAILQ?

And some people wonder why a merge could hever happen. ;(


Nate