>>29
Yeah, he asked for a binary search tree. But what does that mean in the context of a genealogy? Or a genealogical tree? How do you define a total order for the set of all ancestors of a given person?
It's a stupid question. A binary search tree isn't the right structure. A person's entire ancestry (omitting anomalies and complications as shown in
>>33) can be represented as a single simple binary tree.
As for your comment about my tree only showing a single child - durr, your brother/uncle/second-cousin-once-removed didn't contribute to your genetic makeup - they're not in your ancestral tree.
If you'd like to criticize my confusion of an ancestral tree with a genealogical tree (if they're not the same thing), then feel free to do so. Otherwise, you're a dickhead.
Also sage.