Re: What's the difference between a "coroutine" and a "thread" in Lua?

[Stefan Sandberg <keffo.sandberg@...>]

I agree with this completely..  What is currently labeled "thread" is 
just the same as a coroutine, except it's created from the C-side, so 
the docs/typedesc. etc should be unified, imo..

Gregg Reynolds wrote:
> On 8/13/07, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
>   
> > Microsoft calls coroutines "fibres".
> >
> >     
>
> In that case I withdraw the suggestion!  ;)
>
> Even though I'd like to see clearer language in the Lua docs, having
> pondered it a bit more I would be very reluctant to adopt a neologism
> like fiber.  Terminology proliferation is a bit like feature creep,
> plus you run the risk of incurring cuteness penalties; "fiber" looks a
> tad too precious for my taste.  I'm leaning strongly towards plain old
> "non-preemptive thread" if we must.  It's too late now, but if I could
> redesign Lua's lexicon I would make "coroutine" the name of the
> datatype that is currently named "thread".  "function" is a type; why
> not "coroutine"?  The term "thread" could then be used in the informal
> expository prose explaining what a coroutine is.
>
> -gregg
>
>