GeezerVison

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

Maybe the optimization pass should be updated as the hypothesis may not hold:

The generated bytecodes for the same function are different before and after this PR.

FYI, we are in the process of removing small ints from the co_consts tuple: #125972

Can you change the ints in your tests to strings. Doing so will also help test that non-docstring strings do not get interpreted as docstrings.

Maybe the optimization pass should be updated as the hypothesis may not hold:

cpython/Python/flowgraph.c

Lines 2117 to 2119 in 9b14083

	// The first constant may be docstring; keep it always.
	index_map[0] = 0;

The generated bytecodes for the same function are different before and after this PR.

There are a few improvements we can make to the bytecode compiler once this PR is done.
It is probably best to do those in other PRs, once this is working.

It is probably best to do those in other PRs, once this is working.

Yeah, what I concern is whether the constant removal optimization will lead to a unexpected results when the first element in co_consts is no longer None if there is no docstring.

Currently, as the const removal optimization unconditionally keeps the first element in consts, None will present in co_consts even if co has no docstring if there is only one const (i.e., None itself).

Update doc inspect.rst as well.

The UI shows 2 jobs still in progress. But they have completed successfully 🤷‍♂️

Thanks for your review, it's my first PR merged into CPython! And I'm also interested in the following related optimizations.

Thanks for your review, it's my first PR merged into CPython! And I'm also interested in the following related optimizations.

Congratulations! in your next PR, add your name to Misc/ACKS (we should have done it here, but too late now).