In almost all cases, it is better to use a vector for both those data structures. Cache locality is king, memcpy is blazing fast, and pointer chasing is generally pretty bad for performance.

For a stack, just use a regular vector. Pushes are amortized O(1), and pops are O(1).

For a queue, a ring buffer backed by a vector. (This is how VecDeque in Rust's stdlib works.) Again, enqueue is amortized O(1) and dequeue is O(1).

Even if you do need to use a linked list, it's generally better to depend on someone else's implementation than write your own.

> it's generally better to depend on someone else

I am the someone else who writes that, often enough…

All y'all forget that behind your cute libraries and abstractions stands someone who wrote them in C or assembly…

In that case, you'll find that Rust is an excellent language for writing doubly-linked lists.

A lot of the point of Rust is to make a few people do the hard work of writing some complex data structure in unsafe code, and let everyone else reap the benefits.

Where do I send the thank you card?