Re: Overlays as an AA-tree

[Joakim Jalap]

Andreas Politz <address@hidden> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> If I'm right, we *could* use [two trees] [...]
>>
>> But I don't think this one is an efficient solution.  I'm not even sure
>> it will lead to simpler code (at least I'm pretty sure it will lead to
>> more code).
>
> Yes, I'm not in favour of it either.
>
And here I thought it was rather an elegant solution :) (to the problem
of one overlay's beg going past another's because of an insert).

What's a better way? When adjusting for an insert at an overlay with
front-advance non nil, first delete it from the tree, then reinsert it?
Isn't there a risk the tree becomes unbalanced otherwise?