If I understood what the docs say, coroutines may share threads (probably once you use enough of them). It says you must yield them to let other things get worked on.
If you don’t need to, then you shouldn’t.
1 Like
So, how coroutines and tasks work, is I believe they can share a thread (and be a handle underneath them), or they create a completely new thread depending on the availability of other threads.)
Ex:
My threads, which are made up of handles which do their own processing kinda.
The processes are the tasks that are running on my computer (any application)
Threads represent each kind of script or environment of a script
Handles are the individual tasks.
So since they’re running on a different thread this means they ignore the whole serial logic that synchrous code follows?
Yep, essentially it’s like creating a new environment where code is being executed, and it’s previous environment supplies the global variables.
It would be nice if the documentation could go in a bit more detail on how coroutines work, the only reason I figured out coroutines create and run code on different threads is becuase of the devforum.
Alright thanks for the help, much obliged.
Yeah, for me I’m entirely self-taught, but I’m really passionate about programming and computer science so I’m constantly learning and correcting myself. So having that understanding, and just trial and error helps me go through the documentation.
No worries if that’s all then make sure to mark the topic as solved so other people don’t think you still need help, and have a blessed rest of your day! God bless 
Also another thing i’ve realised but sorta unrelated is that programmers make up such dumb fancy words for simple things.
For example, loading/saving data temporarily/permenantly is called “caching”. Can’t they just say loading/saving? Now I have to search up what the word means or ask on the devforum if there isn’t a topic already asking or answering because I think it’s something I need to know.
Serial is a much better word to use than “synchrous” imo, the word “synchronous” sounds like doing something at the same time. Which is what I originally thought before I searched, serial is similiar to the word “series”. I believe scripters should make fancy words like that if they want to be fancy.
Even serial isn’t necessary, simply just saying “in order” is even more easier to understand.
Many people have given many good answers so at this point I’m not really sure who gave the best solution.
They aren’t made up actually…
They are all based on actual words.
Caching - Derived from Cache (which means hidden storage), is the process of storing stuff in the memory.
Synchronous - Derived from the root “chron” which means time, means its running at the same time. Parallel is a synonym. Same with serial.
A lot of programming terms aren’t just bogus, they are just synonyms to describe the same process, it’s only bogus if it didn’t make sense. It’d obviously make sense to use synchronize when talking about timing, and caching when talking about storing hidden data (in the form of memory).
Humbly, I wouldn’t mind. I’m on that grind lel 
Yeah I know they’re actual words but the problem is that they’re using these fancy words when lots of them can easily be converted to simpler definitions. Going back to the serial/synchrous words, caching, and what not.
Yeah, I mean in a way they are helpful but it’s a lot to remember lel. That’s why having a good knowledge in latin roots helps. Thanks be to God for my 8th grade english teacher
This can easily just be said as “saving-data”
This definition was actually more confusing than serial because the actual definition of it is also unrelated to programming.
Serial or better yet “in order” works way better.
They’re nice words and they do make me feel better as much as I don’t wanna admit but I’d definitely rather take the root of using simple words. They’re also a lot harder to remember. Unlike stuff you use in code such as data-types, globals, libraries, etc. Because you can’t practice it, you have to actually memorise those definitions and what not.
Well you aren’t actually saving it, it’s just being stored temporarily. So saving to the memory would be how to describe it, and people get tired of saying that all day, so they use caching.
True, but one of the things about programming is it’s something you’ve got to consistently and constantly practice and do, if you don’t then you’ll start to forget a lot of stuff, and when you do that, then it helps build your memory so it’s way easier to remember the longer you go without doing it.
Well, I never specified as permenant saving. Which is also a way better word, you can say temporary save/permenant save. So much easier to follow.