Red Black Tree implementation?

[Chris Angelico]

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:55 AM, duncan smith <buzzard at invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Here's the text I usually prepend.
>
>
> ##Copyright (c) 2013 duncan g. smith
> ##
> ##Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
> ##copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
> ##to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
> ##the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
> ##and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
> ##Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
> ##
> ##The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included
> ##in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
> ##
> ##THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
> ##OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
> MERCHANTABILITY,
> ##FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL
> ##THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
> ##OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE,
> ##ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
> ##OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
>
>
> Basically, "do what you want with it but don't blame me if it goes tits up".
> I'm happy to consider tidying it up a bit and using a more recognized form
> of licence.

Is that the MIT license? If not, consider using it; it's well known
and trusted. I haven't eyeballed yours closely but it looks extremely
similar, at least.

ChrisA