Mailing list review July 6 - July 22 2021

There was some concern over the wording of the customization point, and I think this needs to be addressed before we can consider forwarding this paper.

People also asked to clarify how much of this paper matches Microsoft's implementation. We also recommend reaching out to libstdc++ implementers for their feedback.
We recommend that someone write a guideline paper to guide future [[nodiscard]] proposals, but also recognize that it sometimes has to be worked-out on a case to case basis.

A lot of discussions about whether this is worth our time.
We seem to be in a catch 22 where some people think [[nodiscard]] should fall strictly under QOI, while some implementations expect [[nodiscard]] to be standardized first.

A few people illustrated cases where users would benefit from [[nodiscard]] being applied.

I am hoping that once the concerns about customization points are addressed, this paper can do a second round of mailing list reviews and then be forwarded through the next round of electronic polling.

The author informed me he is not actively pursuing this paper at this time. we will reopen the issue if a new version of the paper is published.