I wonder how this caching works, given that the dynamic nature means that virtually every operation could have side effects, causing wrong behaviour when cached. The only mitigation for this that I can imagine is that caching just occurs for basic operations defined in the standard library, where it is known that they are free of side effects or "pure". I've frequently explored the new adaptive, inline caching code generated by 3.11. "inline caching" does not mean result caching (like what C/C++ might do) here, but rather it should mean the caching of info used for the adaptive instructions. That means the bytecode stays the same except for the adaptive instructions and the changed `CACHE`s below each adaptive instruction, which should *always* be skipped due to the possibility of misinterpretation as other instructions.