# Why isn't SnoopPrecompile being able to fully compile the calls in this case?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/why-isnt-snoopprecompile-being-able-to-fully-compile-the-calls-in-this-case/92849>\
**Category:** Performance\
**Tags:** package, snoopcompile\
**Created:** [January 12, 2023, 7:38am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/why-isnt-snoopprecompile-being-able-to-fully-compile-the-calls-in-this-case/92849 "2023-01-12T07:38:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tim.holy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/tim.holy/32/52_2.png) [@tim.holy](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/tim.holy)\
**Post date:** [January 12, 2023, 11:41am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/why-isnt-snoopprecompile-being-able-to-fully-compile-the-calls-in-this-case/92849/8 "2023-01-12T11:41:09Z")

</div>

Can you just change line 476 to `additional_descend(get_mi(curs))`?

For a good PR the hard part will be capturing a test, but this seems likely to fix it.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/why-isnt-snoopprecompile-being-able-to-fully-compile-the-calls-in-this-case/92849)._