View source for Talk:Nil

Hey, we need to do a bit of cleanup on this article, ok? Also, I did some testing, and you can recover items deleted with :remove(), but :remove() makes the parent of all the item's children nil as well, so if you did recover the item, it would have no children that it previously had. Just setting the parent to nil, however, allows you to recover the object AND all of it's children, by resetting the parent. -- [[User:JustinP231|JustinP231]] 07:58, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

:Setting the parent to ''nil'' doesn't necessarily delete the object. If the object is referenced, you have to set its parent to ''nil'' AND remove the reference from the variable refering to it, so it can be picked up by the garbagecollector:
<pre>p = Instance.new("Part")
p.Parent = workspace -- part is now a parent of workspace
p.Parent = nil -- part is now a parent of nothing
p.Parent = workspace -- part still exists because it is referenced by 'p'
p.Parent = nil
p = nil -- part is no longer referenced by anything, so it gets picked up by the garbagecollector</pre>
:[[User:Anaminus|Anaminus]] 15:31, 8 May 2008 (CDT)


== Testing ==
The scripts
<pre>game.Workspace.Player.Humanoid.Health = 0</pre>

<pre>game.Workspace.Player.Humanoid.Health = nil</pre>

<pre>
p = Instance.new("Part")
p.Parent = game.Workspace
p.Parent = nil
p.Parent = game.Workspace
p.Parent = nil
p = nil
</pre> work.  That last one is REALLY worth doing... more than once.  
{{User:Mindraker/sig}} 07:12, 24 August 2008 (CDT)

== Wow, ==

Nice scripts now I have reset script for when I get stuck!
--[[User:Sindy|Sindy]] 22:25, 16 September 2008 (CDT)sindy

== Use of the {{tl|type}} template ==

Hold on a second. {{`|nil}}, as used in this article, is a ''value'', not a type. {{type|nil}} is a type which has only one possible value: {{`|nil}}. The {{tl|type}} template is '''not''' appropriate here. {{User:NXTBoy/sig|date=21:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)}}
:Hm, it depends. Technically, they are the same. But.. you're right. Anyways, I was mainly trying it to see what it'd look like. And it looks nice. The thing is, the link links to this article and therefore is shown as bold and doesn't show as a link. <div style="border-top:1px dashed;padding-bottom:.5em;height:1em"><div style="font-size:75%;float:left">[[User:JulienDethurens|JulienDethurens]]</div><div style="font-size:75%;float:right">9 February 2012</div></div>
::Yeah, it might be an idea to override the bold styling. {{User:NXTBoy/sig|date=22:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)}}
:::We'd also need to override the link overline when hovered over. <div style="border-top:1px dashed;padding-bottom:.5em;height:1em"><div style="font-size:75%;float:left">[[User:JulienDethurens|JulienDethurens]]</div><div style="font-size:75%;float:right">9 February 2012</div></div>
::::Why? That indicates it's a link! {{User:NXTBoy/sig|date=23:29, 9 February 2012 (UTC)}}