Alternatives to "while true do" in my script?

Help and Feedback Scripting Support
, ,
#4

You can use RunService and you can use task.wait() instead of wait() because the task library allows u to communicate directly with the game engine’s task schedular.

Here is a link to Task Library if u want to know more about it!

If you can, try to use and somehow implement GetPropertyChangedSignal() instead of while loops in your code.

1 Like
#5

I tried to understand and rewrite the function of your code, and here’s what I came up with:

local next = script.Parent.Parent[tostring(tonumber(script.Parent.Name) - 1)]

script.Parent.ChildAdded:Connect(function(child)
	if child.ClassName ~= "Decal" then return end
	if next:FindFirstChildOfClass("Decal") then return end
	
	wait(2)
	local decals = script.Parent:GetChildren()
	for _,d in ipairs(decals) do
		if d:IsA("Decal") then
			d.Parent = next
		end
	end
end)

I’m not that confident in this code

1 Like
#6

script.Parent.ChildAdded:Connect
Seems like what I was looking for. Lol

Ill try it now.

1 Like
#7

He did the capitalization wrong its Heartbeat

1 Like
#8

For some reason nothing happens.

I think its to do with the function
script.Parent.ChildAdded:Connect(function(child)

I dont really understand why it wouldnt do anything though.
Does the script need to be a Local Script? I dont think using that type would be a good idea though.

#9

I could use GetPropertyChangedSignal() but because the children of the parts would be decals, I dont think I would be able to get it working.

#10

I tested and came up with this script that changes the parent of a Decal to the parts in descending order based on name. Feel free to try it out:

local parts = script.Parent:GetChildren()

table.foreachi(parts, function(i, v)
	if not v:IsA("BasePart") then table.remove(parts, i) end
end)

table.sort(parts, function(a, b)
	return (tonumber(a.Name) or 0) < (tonumber(b.Name) or 0)
end)

for i,p in ipairs(parts) do
	local function onChildAdded(child)
		if not child:IsA("Decal") then return end
		
		local nextPart = parts[i - 1] or parts[#parts]
		if nextPart:FindFirstChildOfClass(child.ClassName) then return end
		
		task.wait(2)
		child.Parent = nextPart
	end
	
	p.ChildAdded:Connect(onChildAdded)
	for _,c in ipairs(p:GetChildren()) do onChildAdded(c) end
end

My explorer:
image

1 Like
#11 
local rs = game:GetService('RunService')

c;c=rs.Heartbeat:Connect(function()
  print("drip")
  c:Disconnect() -- break
end)
#12

Hey, thank you.

Although it returned an error with v:IsA("BasePart"). It couldnt find “IsA”

So then I used v.ClassName ~= "Part" and it errors when finding “ClassName”

#13

If you need something that runs a lot but don’t necessarily need a “while true do” as such, and your code revolves around something that is often changing, you’re potentially better off with Instance.Property.Changed:Connect()

If you absolutely must have a while true do, and you will never ever want to escape it, you can cut down on lines/make it cleaner by making it while wait() do instead. Does the same as putting a wait() in a while true do loop, just a lot less characters.

#14

Weird, change the line:

if not v:IsA("BasePart") then table.remove(parts, i) end

to:

if not v or not v.IsA or not v:IsA("BasePart") then table.remove(parts, i) end

Hopefully should fix it.

I do something like:

while true and wait() do

bad but works lol

#15

Hey. Thank you for this. Ive marked it as the solution.

Also another question, how would I stop part number 1 taking the decal back to the beginning?

#16

I’d love to see the order board in action once it’s done.

#17

In my opinion, this sounds extremely complicated next to just doing “while true do”.

Is there any reason that you do not want to use it?

#18

It is. my previous way of doing this works fine. I was just concerned about the while true do line increasing ping ingame.

Ive decided to just use what I had before instead.

Does “task.wait()” do anything different from “wait()”

#19

I don’t think you have to be worried about that, unless you are using an unhealthy amount of remote events and remote functions. Also, you might wanna include a wait of sorts in the while loop.

#20

Okay thanks.

Btw do you know if task.delay or task.wait would be more helpful than wait?

#21

I’m sorry, I have no clue. You might be able to look it up on google though.

#22

In this case while true is okay to use. It may actually be slower to invoke the disconnect method. Your prior method appeared to be better performance-wise.

#23

in the line:

local nextPart = parts[i - 1] or parts[#parts]

change it to:

if i - 1 < 1 then return end
local nextPart = parts[i - 1]

The script I sent is more efficient and less resource-intensive.