| ▲ | killingtime74 5 hours ago |
| What euphemism do you prefer then... |
|
| ▲ | aragilar 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| There's a difference between dead (i.e. "unmaintained") and low activity ("not under active development"). From what I can see PyPy is in the latter category (and being in that category does not mean it's going to die soon), so choosing to claim it is unmaintained is notable. |
| |
| ▲ | Hamuko 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Being three major versions behind CPython is definitely not a great sign for the long-term viability of it. | | |
| ▲ | saghm 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not sure "major versions" is the most correct term here, but I think your point is spot on | | |
| ▲ | Hamuko 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | For Python, 0.1 increases are major versions and 1.0 increases are cataclysmic shifts. | | |
| ▲ | johndough 25 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I don't know about that. For me, f-strings were the last great quality-of-life improvement that I wouldn't want to live without, and those landed in Python 3.6. Everything after that has not really made much of a difference to me. | | |
| ▲ | toyg 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | That's like saying the last tax that affected you was passed in 2006... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | kev009 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Undermaintained might be more suited since it does have life but doesn't appear commercially healthy nor apparently relevant to other communities. |
| |
