# Taking TTFX seriously: Can we make common packages faster to load and use

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/taking-ttfx-seriously-can-we-make-common-packages-faster-to-load-and-use/74949
**Category:** Performance
**Tags:** ttfp
**Created:** [January 20, 2022, 5:16pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/taking-ttfx-seriously-can-we-make-common-packages-faster-to-load-and-use/74949 "2022-01-20T17:16:03Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 46

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![lmiq](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/lmiq/32/18314_2.png) [@lmiq](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/lmiq)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2022, 5:39pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/taking-ttfx-seriously-can-we-make-common-packages-faster-to-load-and-use/74949/46 "2022-01-24T17:39:54Z")

</div>

> [@Why isn't \`size\` always inferred to be an Integer?](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/why-isnt-size-always-inferred-to-be-an-integer/75139/7):
>
> I don’t think the compiler reads the docs.

I wander if the compiler could read assertions, though, and use that information.

Question more on the subject: Can someone provide a clear step by step of what they are doing to produce these flamegraphs and benchmarking the TTFX? It is not clear to me how to do that, given that the first execution of the profile has to be discarded, and on the second run well, it is not anymore the first run (at least the one from VSCode these are the instructions).

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/taking-ttfx-seriously-can-we-make-common-packages-faster-to-load-and-use/74949)._