Despite being a totally different language based around message passing with no control structures?

None of those are insurmountable, they merely make writing a JIT harder if you want to support them: it’s hard to inline a function call if the inclining can have a visible effect.

That is the whole point, it doesn't get more dynamic than that.

I’d say the lack of control flow structures and message passing would make it far, far easier to JIT.

If that was the case, there would be no need for StrongTalk.

Can you really not think of any other benefits?

I certainly can, and I can also think of several examples of dynamic languages that succeed where Python fails.

All of them just as dynamic, if not more.

If you can think of other benefits to Strongtalk other than “it makes jit compiling better” then why say that there is no reason for it to exist if Smalltalk’s design makes it easy to JIT?

Python is not even able to do the basic Smalltalk part, so it doesn't matter what StrongTalk brings into the picture.

Ok now we are on the same page about there being a need for Strongtalk other than “it may or may not JIT better” we will loop back a few comments and try again:

I’d say the lack of control flow structures and message passing would make it far, far easier to JIT.