GeezerVison

Marking as draft as I need make this work with the new CALL convention.

Maybe we should merge #31002 first, as that PR is simpler.
It would also allow us to compare the performance of just the specialization, without the removal of frame object allocation.

Maybe we should merge #31002 first, as that PR is simpler. It would also allow us to compare the performance of just the specialization, without the removal of frame object allocation.

👍

Mark, I'm going to run benchmarks on deltablue first since it uses 2-argument form super. I'll address your optimization ideas for the 0-arg form once those results come back. Fingers crossed.

Mark, I'm going to run benchmarks on deltablue first since it uses 2-argument form super. I'll address your optimization ideas for the 0-arg form once those results come back. Fingers crossed.

Well that was depressing. deltablue only shows 1.03x speedup. Looking closer at the code, super isn't called in any tight loops so that might be why. Maybe I need to pull out microbenchmarks now.

Microbenchmarks show that super() has sped up by more than 2.2x. This is faster than that other attempt because there's also speedups from the LOAD_METHOD_CACHED:
(Extremely unscientific, I'm short on time to set up pyperf right now)

import timeit

setup = """
class A:
    def f(self): pass
class B(A):
    def g(self): super().f()
    def h(self): self.f()

b = B()
"""

# super() call
print(timeit.timeit("b.g()", setup=setup, number=20_000_000))
# reference
print(timeit.timeit("b.h()", setup=setup, number=20_000_000))

Results:

# Main
5.796037399995839
2.4094066999969073

# This branch
2.4578273000006448
2.3718886000060593

So super().meth() is now only ~10% slowly than the corresponding self.meth() call whereas it was nearly 2x as slow previously. If I manage to incorporate your suggestions correctly, this will effectively just be a competition between LOAD_GLOBAL_BUILTIN (super) and LOAD_FAST (self).