dmd 1.057 and 2.041 release

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:54:16 -0500, Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Michal Minich wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:23:07 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>
>>> I want to focus more on the fact that you are declaring the data after
>>> the slice as being no longer used.
>>
>> kind of assumeUnique ...
>>
>> assumeNoArrayReference ?
>
> I like that. Or assumeNoMemoryAliasing. It should be clear that it is a
> potentially very unsafe function.

I like this train of thought, assume is a good term for what you are  
doing, and it is consistent with assumeUnique.

The only thing I don't like about it is you aren't really assuming  
anything about the slice, you are assuming the data after the slice is no  
longer used.  It looks weird that you are assuming something about the  
slice.

assumeEndOfData ?
assumeAllocation ?

I don't 100% like those either.

-Steve