Last updates to the R0 version to go into tomorrow's mailing.
Change log:
    - Add change in deprecation section
    - Added Wouter Van Ooijen and SG14 to thanks
    - Removed an unfortunate split in the word de-deprecate
    - Added paragraph about vendors not being willing to update headers
    - Added SG22 to audience

Den fre. 9. apr. 2021 kl. 18.54 skrev Ben Craig <ben.craig_at_[hidden]>:
>
> Cross posting this to the liaison list. The paper didn't seem to make it into the March mailing.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: SG14 <sg14-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Paul M. Bendixen
> > via SG14
> > Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 4:11 PM
> > To: Low Latency:Game Dev/Financial/Trading/Simulation/Embedded Devices
> > <sg14_at_[hidden]>; Wouter van Ooijen <wouter.vanooijen_at_[hidden]>
> > Cc: Paul M. Bendixen <paulbendixen_at_[hidden]>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [SG14] Challenging the deprecation of volatile
> > compound statements
> >
> > A last minute update for the paper.
> > I've added a new section (2.3) that describes how removing the possibility to
> > have compound expressions might generate bugs.
> >
> > If it is too abrasive, please let me know, however I feel this is also an
> > important point.
> >
> > Michael I don't really know how to get this paper into the mailing for the next
> > meeting, could you help with this? (Also should I update the R number?)
> >
> > I was made aware that the deprecation paper will also be discussed at the
> > upcoming liaison meeting with the C committee. So maybe this could be
> > valuable input.
> >
> > /Paul
> > --
> > • − − •/• −/• • −/• − • •/− • • •/•/− •/− • •/• •/− • • −/•/− •/• − − •− •/−
> > − •/− −/• −/• •/• − • •/• − • − • −/− • − •/− − −/− −//

-- 
• − − •/• −/• • −/• − • •/− • • •/•/− •/− • •/• •/− • • −/•/− •/• − −
•− •/− − •/− −/• −/• •/• − • •/• − • − • −/− • − •/− − −/− −//