baldr, Hm..., I thought JC=JB. Is there some additional context which I am missing? I like to use the instruction which matches the flag - if possible. The (C)arry flag is set, so I use JC. This is purely stylistic on my part though. JB is a higher conceptual notation, the destination being (B)elow the source - in the unsigned integer sort of way.


Stout and Warren's paper from 1986 is a good start, if one wants to control the balancing in a non-dynamic way. We can imagine a list being analogous to a static vine (vine, as from the paper), and they outline an optimal way to convert that into a tree.

[Which would result in a table and code reduction to FASM, but has the added complication of alternate list (tree) organization.]