DMD 1.029 and 2.013 releases

[Sean Kelly]

== Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy at yahoo.com)'s article
> "Sean Kelly" wrote
> > Walter Bright wrote:
> >> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
> >> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.029.zip
> >>
> >> This starts laying the foundation for multiprogramming support:
> >>
> >> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/changelog.html
> >> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.013.zip
> >
> > TLS huh?  Nice!  So what will replace the volatile statement?  As it is,
> > that was the only safe way to perform lock-free operations in D.
> You can sort of work around it by wrapping the previously volatile statement
> in a function, but it seems like having volatile doesn't really hurt
> anything.  I'm curious to know why it was so bad that it was worth
> removing...

...and the function has to be opaque.  And even then, I think there's a risk
that something undesirable may happen--I'd have to give it some thought.
I'd guess that 'volatile' is being deprecated in favor of some sort of C++0x
style atomics, but for the moment D no longer has a solution for this.  It's
a bit upsetting, particularly since it effectively deprecates the atomic library
code I wrote for D some three years ago.  As a point of interest, that code is
structurally very similar to what the C++0x group decided on just last summer,
but it's been around for at least a year and a half longer.


Sean