Erm, red-black trees don't have a derivation from gambling terminology either. The wikipedia article says:

In a 1978 paper, "A Dichromatic Framework for Balanced Trees",[6] Leonidas J. Guibas and Robert Sedgewick derived the red-black tree from the symmetric binary B-tree.[7] The color "red" was chosen because it was the best-looking color produced by the color laser printer available to the authors while working at Xerox PARC.[8] Another response from Guibas states that it was because of the red and black pens available to them to draw the trees.[9]

Left-right tree makes no sense. It doesn't distinguish the rbtree from its predecessor the avl tree.  I don't think it's helpful to rename a standard piece of computing terminology unless it's actually hurting us to have it. Obviously if it were called a "master-slave" tree, I would be in favour of renaming it.

On Sat., Jul. 4, 2020, 19:42 Dave Airlie, <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
'. Colors to represent a policy requires an indirection. The
>
> how about:
>               Using colors to represent a policy requires an indirection.

I'd totally submit that red/black trees while in no way racist, are a
horrible indirection, as it means nothing if you've never interacted
with gambling culture, (and maybe James Bond movies).

left/right trees make naturally more sense and translate into more
languages, so yes I think removal of color naming is a good thing even
for non-racist reasonings.

Dave.
_______________________________________________
Ksummit-discuss mailing list
Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss