Luau Recap: June 2020

… otherwise known as “This Month in Luau” I guess? You know the drill by now. We’ll talk about exciting things that happened to Luau - our new language stack.

anxiously glances at FIB3 thread that casts a huge shadow on this announcement, but hopefully somebody will read this

Many people work on these improvements; thanks @Apakovtac, @EthicalRobot, @fun_enthusiast, @zeuxcg!

If you have missed previous large announcements, here they are:

We have a website!

Many developers told us on many occasions that as much as they love the recaps, it’s hard to know what the state of the language or libraries is if the only way to find out is to read through all updates. What’s the syntax extensions that Luau supports now? How do I use type checking? What’s the status of <my favorite feature> from Lua 5.x?

Well, you can find all of this out here now: Luau - Luau

Please let us know if this documentation can be improved - what are you missing, what could be improved. For now to maximize change velocity this documentation is separate from DevHub; it’s also meant as an external resource for people who don’t really use the language but are curious about the differences and novelties.

Also, _VERSION now returns "Luau" because we definitely aren’t using Lua 5.1 anymore.

Compound assignments

A long-standing feature request for Lua is compound assignments. Somehow Lua never got this feature, but Luau now implements +=, -=, *=, /=, %=, ^= and ..= operators. We decided to implement them because they are absolutely ubiquitous among most frequently used programming languages, both those with C descent and those with different lineage (Ruby, Python). They result in code that’s easier to read and harder to make mistakes in.

We do not implement ++ and --. These aren’t universally adopted, -- conflicts with comment syntax and they are arguably not as intuitively obvious. We trust everyone to type a few extra characters for += 1 without too much trouble.

Two important semantical notes are that the expressions on the left hand side are only evaluated once, so for example table[makeIndex()] += 1 only runs makeIndex once, and that compound assignments still call all the usual metamethod (__add et al, and __index/__newindex) when necessary - you don’t need to change any data structures to work with these.

There’s no noticeable performance improvement from these operators (nor does using them carry a cost) - use them when they make sense for readability.

Nicer error messages

Good errors are critical to be able to use Luau easily. We’ve spent some time to improve the quality of error messages during parsing and runtime execution:

  • In runtime type errors, we now often use the “Roblox” type name instead of plain userdata, e.g. math.abs(v) now says number expected, got Vector3
  • When arguments are just missing, we now explicitly say that they are missing in libraries like math/table; the old message was slightly more confusing
  • string.format in some cases produced error messages that confused missing arguments for incorrect types, which has been fixed
  • When a builtin function such as math.abs fails, we now add the function name to the error message. This is something that used to happen in Lua, then we lost this in Luau because Luau removes a very fragile mechanism that supported that, but we now have a new, robust way to report this so you can have the function name back! The message looks like this now: invalid argument #1 to 'abs' (number expected, got nil)
  • In compile-time type errors, we now can identify the case when the field was mistyped with a wrong case (ha), and tell you to use the correct case instead.
  • When you forget an end statement, we now try to be more helpful and point you to the problematic statement instead of telling you that the end is missing at the very end of the program. This one is using indentation as a heuristic so it doesn’t always work perfectly.
  • We now have slightly more helpful messages for cases when you forget parentheses after a function call
  • We now have slightly more helpful messages for some cases when you accidentally use ( ... ) instead of { ... } to create a table literal

Additionally two places had very lax error checking that made the code more fragile, and we fixed those:

  • xpcall now fails immediately when the error function argument is not a function; it used to work up until you get an error, and failed at that point, which made it hard to find these bugs
  • tostring now enforces the return type of the result to be a string - previously __tostring could return a non-string result, which worked fine up until you tried to do something like passing the resulting value to string.format for %s. Now tostring will fail early.

Our next focus here is better error messages during type checking - please let us know if there are other errors you find confusing and we could improve!

Type checker improvements

We’re getting closer and closer to be able to move out of beta. A big focus this month was on fixing all critical bugs in the type checker - it now should never hang or crash Studio during type checking, which took a bit of work to iron out all the problems.

Notably, typing function string.length no longer crashes Studio (although why you’d do that is unclear), and Very Large Scripts With Tons Of Nested Statements And Expressions should be stable as well.

We’ve also cleaned up the type information for builtin libraries to make it even more precise, including a few small fixes to string/math functions, and a much more precise coroutine library type information. For the latter we’ve introduced a primitive type thread, which is what coroutine library works with.

Linter improvements

Linter is the component that produces warnings about scripts; it’s otherwise known as “Static Analysis” in Studio, although that is now serving as a place where we show type errors as well.

Most of the changes here this month are internal as they concern warnings that aren’t yet enabled in Studio (the web site linked above documents all warnings including ones that aren’t active yet but may become active), but once notable feature is that you can now opt out of individual warnings on a script-by-script basis by adding a --!nolint comment to the top of the script. For example, if you really REALLY REALLY like the Game global, you can add this to the top of the script:

--!nolint DeprecatedGlobal

Or, if you basically just want us to not issue any warnings ever, I guess you can add this:


and live happily ignorant of all possible errors up until you run your code. (please don’t do that)

os. enhancements

Our overall goal is to try to be reasonably compatible with Lua 5.x in terms of library functions we expose. This doesn’t always work - in some cases we have to remove library features for sandboxing reasons, and in others the library functions don’t make sense in context of Roblox. However, some of these decisions can be revised later. In particular, when we re-added os. library to Roblox, we limited it to, os.time and os.difftime (although why difftime is a thing isn’t clear), omitting os.clock and restricting inputs to to return a table with date components, whereas Lua 5.x supports format strings.

Well, this changes today. os.clock is now available if you need a high-precision time for benchmarking, and can now return formatted date using Lua 5.x format string that you can read about here Programming in Lua : 22.1 (we support all these specifiers: aAbBcdHIjmMpSUwWxXyYzZ).

While is hopefully welcome, os.clock may raise some eyebrows - aren’t there enough timing functions in Roblox already? Well, this is nice if you are trying to port code from Lua 5.x to Luau, and there’s this

But really, most existing Roblox timing functions are… problematic.

  • time() returns the total amount of time the game has been running simulation for, it’s monotonic and has reasonable precision. It’s fine - you can use it to update internal gameplay systems without too much trouble. It should’ve been called “tick” perhaps but that ship has sailed.
  • elapsedTime and its close cousin ElapsedTime, are telling you “how much time has elapsed since the current instance of Roblox was started.”. While technically true, this isn’t actually useful because on mobile the “start” time here can be days in the past. It’s also inadequate for performance measurements as on Windows, it has a 1ms resolution which isn’t really enough for anything interesting. We’re going to deprecate this in the future.
  • tick() sounds perfect - it has a high resolution (usually around 1 microsecond), and a well-defined baseline - it counts since UNIX epoch! Or, well, it actually doesn’t. On Windows, it returns you a variant of the UNIX timestamp in local time zone. In addition, it can be off by 1 second from the actual, real UNIX timestamp, and might have other idiosyncrasies on non-Windows platforms. We’re going to deprecate this in the future.

So, if you need a UNIX timestamp, you should use os.time(). You get a stable baseline (from 1970’s) and 1s resolution. If you need to measure performance, you should use os.clock(). You don’t get a stable baseline, but you get ~1us resolution. If you need to do anything else, you should probably use time().

Performance optimizations

As you can never have too much performance, we’re continuing to work on performance! We’re starting to look into making Vector3 faster and improving the garbage collector, with some small changes already shipping, but overall it’s a long way out so here are the things that did get visibly better:

  • A few string. methods, notably string.byte and string.char , were optimized to make it easier to write performant deserialization code. string.byte is now ~4x faster than before for small numbers of returned characters. For optimization to be effective, it’s important to call the function directly ( string.byte(foo, 5) ) instead of using method calls ( foo:byte(5) )
  • Optimize coroutine resumption, making some code that is heavily reliant on coroutine. library ~10% faster. We have plans to improve this further, watch this space.
  • Optimize typeof() to run ~6x faster. It used to be that type() was much faster than typeof() but they now should be more or less comparable.
  • Some secret internal optimizations make some scripts a few percent faster
  • The memory allocator used in Luau was rewritten using a new, more efficient, implementation. There might be more changes here in the future to save some memory, but for now this makes some allocation-intensive benchmarks ~15% faster.
  • Using tables with keys that are not strings or numbers is a fair bit more efficient now (most commonly comes up when Instance is used as a key in a hash table), on par with using strings.

Also we found a bug with some of our optimizations (which delayed the string. performance improvement above, but also could affect some math. calls) where in some complex functions you would see valid calls to math. etc. breaking with non-sensical errors such as “expected number, got table” - this has been fixed!

Memory optimizations

As with performance, our goal here is simple - the more efficient internal Luau structures can become, the less memory will Lua heap take. This is great for both memory consumption, and for garbage collection performance as the collector needs to traverse less data. There’s a few exciting changes in this area this month:

  • Non-array-like tables now take 20% less space. This doesn’t affect arrays but can be observed on object-like tables, both big and small. This is great because some of you are using a lot of large tables apparently, since this resulted in very visible reduction in overall Lua heap sizes across all games.
  • Function objects now take up to 30% less space. This isn’t as impactful since typically function objects are not created very frequently and/or don’t live for very long, but it’s nice nonetheless.
  • New allocator mentioned in the previous section can save up to 5-6% of Lua heap memory as well, although these gains are highly dependent on the workload, and we usually see savings in the 1-2% range.

And that’s it! Till next time. As usual let us know if you have questions, suggestions or bug reports.

How Luau works?
Equivenlant of i++
Differences between these exactly similar functions?
Does tick() function still work?
Improve Custom Wait Function
Luau Recap: August 2020
Math.randomseed? What's it for?
Simple to learn notes on time() / tick(), For animation or movement scripts and so forth
Is there any real difference between os.time() and tick()?
Looping infinity?
Script Keeps Restarting when a Click Event Occurs
Having Problems with making Server Timer
How do i stop error spam from badge touch?
Global Time Across All Servers
Benchmarker module
Alternatives to tick() and time()
What is os.clock?
How to check if 1 hour has passed
Does tick() function still work?
Does tick() function still work?
Racing: How To Keep Track Of Race Positions
A Guide to Making Proper Anti-Exploits
Again about death animation. Animation not working
How do you do trigonometry calculations? like view bobbing calculations etc
Would this work for Making a Health bar Disapear within a Period of time?
Make your own custom wait function! (FASTER THAN 1/180 of a second!)
*DO NOT USE* High precision clock syncing tech between clients and server with accuracy of <1ms
Time & You: A Quick Reference for All Things Roblox and Time
Time & You: A Quick Reference for All Things Roblox and Time
Time & You: A Quick Reference for All Things Roblox and Time
How to get rid of global cooldowns | How to make table of cooldowns with os.clock() or tick()
Os.clock() time is different in the studio than it is in-game? reference should be updated to add new formatted date strings
Alternatives To tick()?

What a very, very exciting month!


Are all string methods planned to be optimised? I’ve always used the string library over the methods as I’ve found it’s cleaner, with this I would like to atleast know that they are all going to become faster in some way or another.

Otherwise, I love the compound operators :drooling_face:


Still a bit confused on why tick() needs to be deprecated, I personally never had issues with it and I think some game that use like daily reward systems or hourly reward systems are pretty dependant on it.

Will the keyword tick() get completely deprecated or is the function itself going to be replaced/rewritten? (No need to edit any scripts that use tick()?)

Other than that, I’m pretty excited about this, my code will run so much faster with this.

I got excited about the optimization and table part because I like to use instances as keys, use metatables where possible and have huge tables sometimes, so those optimizations are gonna help a lot.

Edit: is that a unintended pun I saw in the beginning of your thread? I like it.


This is amazing. There has been so many times where I have had to do something like:
workspace.Userdata:FindFirstChild(player.Name.."_Data").Money.Value = workspace.Userdata:FindFirstChild(player.Name.."_Data").Money.Value + 1

And I always felt like it was taking forever having to type out THE EXACT SAME THING TWICE (and repeating the action increases the chance of misspelling or otherwise messing something up). Now my code can be cleaner with only having to type:
workspace.Userdata:FindFirstChild(player.Name.."_Data").Money.Value += 1

I remember seeing a recent discussion on how it could be inaccurate, so it’s great to get some more info on how tick() works.


For us usually “deprecated” means “it works but the use is discouraged”.

For hourly reward systems, the use of os.time() is likely more appropriate. tick() on Windows is time zone specific, which means that if the user plays the game from two different time zones in the single day you may see some strange results from this.

edit ah, and also it’s different between Windows and other systems, so if the same user plays the game on desktop and mobile the resulting times are going to differ. All of this is likely not too critical for your use case, but the point of deprecating this function is that it has incredibly strange behavior that nobody actually wants. Of course games using it will continue to work just as they do today.


The github post has a small error. You forgot to add p:Point instead of just p. Right now p.z will not error. (at least it shouldn’t)


Is there any reason to use type() nowadays? The only use I can find is that if you need to check it was a userdata for some odd reason.

(Sandboxing Page)

debug. library has been removed to a large extent, as it has functions that aren’t memory safe and other functions break isolation; the only supported functions are traceback and getinfo (with reduced functionality).

We also have profilebegin/profileend :slight_smile:

Props to the people working on this! Luau is becoming seriously awesome.


Please note that at this time we are not ready to make Luau implementation publically available in the source form. Right now the only interface to Luau is the Roblox engine (exposed in Roblox game client/server and Roblox Studio).

Is there (even the very unlikely chance) that Luau will ever be open sourced anytime in the next year or two?


Ok. This system clock is confusing me, so I want to clarify some things. For context, I use tick() for everything right now, including computing spring deltas for updating a UI element.

Is this grid accurate?

The implication is I should use os.clock() or time() for EVERYTHING, unless I want stuff to synchronize with the game time. I’m ok with clocks running backwards if my clock doesn’t lag, although maybe that can create stutter?

Can you tell me if:

  • time() lags if simulation lags
  • time() is 1:1 with real time, or would disconnect?
  • What is time()"s resolution?
  • What does “stable baseline” mean in reference to os.clock()? Does os.clock() run backwards? Does it drift over time?
  • Does calling any of these methods have performance implications?

os.clock() isn’t relative to anything in particular. I think your table is correct otherwise? time() indeed reflects the simulation time so it’s not a good solution for UI animations :-/

edit ah, no, time() baseline is wrong in the table - time() actually starts when the game starts (which is important! on mobile this means it’ll start when the user hits Play, not when they started the app)

This is a surprisingly complex topic :smiley:

  • time() lags if simulation lags


  • time() is 1:1 with real time, or would disconnect?

It’s 1:1 with simulation time, so it can disconnect. It’s good to use when you’re using it to model simulation of your own objects.

  • What is time()"s resolution?

It’s advanced every frame by the precise amount of time (~microseconds) it took to complete the last frame, but note that it’s actually the same during the frame - which is good for simulation because this means you can use it in multiple scripts and have a consistent simulation behavior

  • What does “stable baseline” mean in reference to os.clock()? Does os.clock() run backwards? Does it drift over time?

It just means that you shouldn’t assume that “0” in os.clock() timeline means anything. It should be monotonic, which means that whether it drifts over time or not is, uh, dependent on your definition of drifting (drifting from what?)

  • Does calling any of these methods have performance implications?

time() and os.clock() are pretty fast. os.time() might be a touch slower? I wouldn’t be hugely concerned with this unless you call either in a tight loop.


The description of hex escapes on this page is incorrect; the syntax is \xAB, not \0xAB.

Otherwise, this seems like… a description for a github repo, not just for us. Specifically, the details on sandboxing and embedding Luau give me pause since it reads like a pitch for using Luau and explanation of it… :eyes:

I don’t have anything specific to say about this thread beyond “thanks for the website” though. I’ll spare you running commentary as I read through it.

Was this ever properly announced anywhere or is this just on the website?


Excellent information! Thank you! I’ve had several discussions about what exactly to use, so this is very good to learn!

A few more questions:

  • I’m hearing that I should replace all my tick() calls with os.clock() calls! Does that seem right?
  • Is time() good for clock/spring steps in cameras? I think maybe using that would fix some issues with animations.
  • Is time() the same as RunService.Heartbeat() and RunService.Stepped()'s dt?
    • Can I avoid using these parameters, and just use time() instead, if I wanted to?

Does this updated table look correct?

Thank you so much, this is very interesting.



As noted the site serves both Roblox developers who want to be up to date on what Luau can do, and also as an information portal to answer “what, why, how” questions about Luau vs Lua. Also Roblox community tends to be very technical and curious so the extra detail hopefully doesn’t hurt either! No comments other than this :smiley:

We supported this from day 1 I believe, but I don’t recall if this was described in the original type checking beta post. This is part of the motivation to have the web site :slight_smile:

1 Like

Probably not, because this would mean it slows down when physics starts to throttle. For this the ideal case for us would be to expose a time value similar to game time (which is what time() returns) that’s a consistent render time synced with RenderStepped…

Although we have pretty bold plans re: physics simulation that may affect this. For now I think os.clock() is an adequate replacement to tick() for anything that doesn’t need the “almost UNIX timestamp” characteristics?

Is time() the same as RunService.Heartbeat() and RunService.Stepped()'s dt?

time() isn’t a delta time, but it should be the same as the first argument to Stepped.


Why does the “view project on GitHub” redirect to 404? Might want to fix it or even better make Luau open source, I would love to use Lua + static types in my external backend for my Roblox game.


The Luau repository is private, and Luau’s implementation isn’t ready to be publicly available in it’s source form yet, as said in the Open Source section of Why Luau?

Please note that at this time we are not ready to make Luau implementation publically available in the source form. Right now the only interface to Luau is the Roblox engine (exposed in Roblox game client/server and Roblox Studio).


We don’t generally oppose syntax changes, however syntax changes are the highest impact changes to the language and as such they deserve a lot of scrutiny. For example, syntax that provides an alternate method to spell something without significant readability / performance improvements might not be a good idea. There’s no clear cut rules here, here’s a snippet from an internal discussion we’ve had on this topic a few months ago with my comments:

Hopefully this helps. We will add new syntax if we decide that it’s really impactful, but we won’t add new syntax just because language X has it or just because it seems like a neat idea.

On constants, there’s some information here We may pursue this but it currently doesn’t have substantial upsides, and it’s not obvious that one more way to declare a local is a good idea. There’s probably a long way before this in establishing mutability constraints within the type system.

edit oh, the “feature points” in the comment above are in reference to an excellent Negative 100 Points - Strongly Emergent (unfortunately the original article has been lost when MSDN blogs were discontinued).


A lot of this is really exciting! Thank you so much for all the work you have been doing on increasing usability and performance.

How would you feel about renaming time() to simulatedTime() or simulatedtime()?

Also, are structs in the pipeline?
Ideally these would get the same performance:

function add(
	a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, a8, a9
	b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6, b7, b8, b9
		a1 + b1,
		a2 + b2,
		a3 + b3,
		a4 + b4,
		a5 + b5,
		a6 + b6,
		a7 + b7,
		a8 + b8,
		a9 + b9

type structType = [
	[1]: number;
	[2]: number;
	[3]: number;
	[4]: number;
	[5]: number;
	[6]: number;
	[7]: number;
	[8]: number;
	[9]: number;

function add(A, B)
	return [
		[1] = A[1] + B[1];
		[2] = A[2] + B[2];
		[3] = A[3] + B[3];
		[4] = A[4] + B[4];
		[5] = A[5] + B[5];
		[6] = A[6] + B[6];
		[7] = A[7] + B[7];
		[8] = A[8] + B[8];
		[9] = A[9] + B[9];
	]: structType