Talk:Unladen Swallow

Info from Google Code

I've dumped some information from the Google Code page. Someone with a deeper understanding of this project should contribute to this article. --Artagnon (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

is this project still active, there hasnt been a code update in quite some time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122589423KM (talk • contribs) 13:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some informations about the recent project activity and its future. --Thcourbon (talk contribs) 09:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added refs about withdrawal of Google support, changed to past tense. --John Nagle (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A former Unladen Swallow developer's comments

There is a retrospective of why Unladen swallow isn't really active any more on the blog of http://qinsb.blogspot.com/2011/03/unladen-swallow-retrospective.html .

144.32.48.87 (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why only list the negative stuff??

Did the project achieve nothing??

It seems bizarre that this article talks exclusively about how dead the project might be and how it didn't meet its ambitious goals.

I mean, even if it didn't achieve a 500% speed increase, did it achieve a 20% increase? Did any improvements make it into CPython? Gronky (talk) 07:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The project indeed achieved nothing or almost nothing. It definitely did not live up to the hype it generated. Relevant changes that actually did something (like cPickle improvements) made it upstream, the rest was not that interesting countryhacker (talk) 11:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But that's more than nothing. Anything that got merged upstream is an achievement. I'll add a mention of cPickle to the article. If you could add anything else, that would be great. Gronky (talk) 00:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]