>Perhaps there should be a list_has_more_than_one() API, as list_is_singular >requires two checks, and the "more_than_one" only requires a single check. > >list_is_singular() is: > > return !list_empty(list) && (list->next == list->prev); > > >which is more work than what you are replacing. >
Hi, Steve: Thanks for your explanation. Maybe we should add another api called "list_more_than_one" just without list_empty() check. I will send PATCH V2 later. Thank.

