GeezerVison

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

Ok, looks like it was used recently in #110769 by @ambv
I think that this has nothing to do with reperf, it just needs any rather complex module.

I propose to:

• replace test_embed's code to generate the module from code, so it would have no depedencies
• still remove this module, we are cleaning things up, aren't we? :)

I am now using another file instead of reperf, it is already used in test_embed and is useful for this test as well: it prints the information, it has some imports, it does some checks.

So, we can remove the unneeded reperf 🎉

@encukou looks like this PR #113601 influenced the CI. I fixed tests, so now both ./python.exe -m test test_embed and ./python.exe Lib/test/_test_embed_structseq.py pass:

» ./python.exe Lib/test/_test_embed_structseq.py            
..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 2 tests in 0.000s

OK
Tests passed

Please, take another look :)

OK. Thanks!