Create templates to quickly answer FAQs or store snippets for re-use.
There are three things to know regarding linked list based structures (including double linked lists and more complex structures):
they're very rarely the most efficient structure, even if their theoretical big O cost is pretty. They consume a lot of memory and this memory is fragmented.
they almost always imply tricky corner cases which means a big test list and some unexpected bugs after months or years of production (true story, and that was billions of computations during 15 years until a case that I finally understood)
sometimes they're useful... probably not for your problem, and you should have checked you didn't in fact need a ring buffer or a vector, but yes there are still some use cases...
I haven't used linked lists in 30y,but at that time, I was working on a banking application and we needed to track and present a set of chronological transactions. We did not have a meaningful RDBMS for PC's, so we created our own in memory and disk persisted, using essentially the same linkage, translating the pointers into primary keys. The product never made it to market (long story) and I have rarely used this approach since.
That said, it underpins a number of standard data structures used today, just hidden in the background.
Which data structures are you referring to when you say "it underpins a number of standard data structures used today". I'm assuming stacks and queues. Is there anything else?
Also, thanks for responding. I'm learning so much from reading responses to all the blog posts.
I was thinking ques and stacks, but also task continuations / cancelations - all linking of a form
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.