Clarify the new Red-Black post-order traversal code a bit.

Clarify the new Red-Black post-order traversal code a bit.

Coverity complained about the for(;;) loop, because it never actually
iterated. It was used just to be able to use "break" to exit it early. I
agree with Coverity, that's a bit confusing, so refactor the code to
use if-else instead.

While we're at it, use a local variable to hold the "current" node. That's
shorter and clearer than referring to "iter->last_visited" all the time.