GeezerVison

This isn't used anywhere, is it?

Mmh, yes, this one isn't used anymore. I wondered whether I needed one but I don't need to. I'll amend this one.

Side comment: this function should return -1 instead of 1 as it's the case for other Py_mod_exec functions (I got surprised by the "return 1"). It doesn't really matter per se, but I think we should generally document what kind of values we expect for Py_mod_* handlers and tp_* ones (it's not clear what tp_clear should return and when).

Currently, errors in Py_mod_exec functions are indicated by a non-zero return value, but it's not documented. I would advise that we document this.

Instead of using a hardcoded magic number, it would be nice if we used _PY_NSMALLPOSINTS * 2 or something like that to make sure this test always works, even if we increase _PY_NSMALLPOSINTS in the future.

I am actually unsure whether we need hardcoding here actually because of the JIT. I'll check if changing it to a compile-time known value is necessary or not.

Yeah that's what I feared. While the test still passes, the uops will be different. I don't remember when we have some inlined computations x * y that are then transformed in a single LOAD_CONST.

Also, I think we should make such change at other places as well. If you want to, let's open a separate issue.