DaSpudLord wrote:

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

No support, easy to workaround.

That argument I use for block ideas. This is not a block idea. Your attempted irony is invalid.

You lack full support for anything that has a workaround. I can't help but interpret this as slightly hypocritical.

Again, notice the difference between a block idea and this idea?

There is certainly a difference and I acknowledge that however they fall under the same category of creating unnecessary complexity. You're evidently a supporter of that.

I'm trying to figure out whether or not you're joking…

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

...

Take a wild guess . Anyway, whether you believe your suggestion to be hypocritical or not, there's still a point that's been made: you lack full support for anything that has a workaround. Even <true> and <false> blocks! There are core features of languages which you lack support for due to the existence of a workaround. Of course there's a workaround for most things but some features should not be kept from being added to the language just because there's an available workaround. That belief does create unnecessary complexity.

if <true::operators> then//Because this will always be true, no matter what, then you don't need this if block.
...//Just place this outside of the if block and delete the if block.
end

if <false::operators> then//Because this will always be false, no matter what, then again, you don't need this.
...//Just delete this script; it's completely useless.
end

DaSpudLord wrote:

if <true::operators> then//Because this will always be true, no matter what, then you don't need this if block.
...//Just place this outside of the if block and delete the if block.
end

if <false::operators> then//Because this will always be false, no matter what, then again, you don't need this.
...//Just delete this script; it's completely useless.
end

define move (steps) steps, bounce? <bounce>
    move (steps) steps
    if <bounce :: custom> then
        if on edge, bounce
    end

move (10) steps, bounce? <not <>> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <> :: custom

move (10) steps, bounce? <true :: operators> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <false :: operators> :: custom

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

if <true::operators> then//Because this will always be true, no matter what, then you don't need this if block.
...//Just place this outside of the if block and delete the if block.
end

if <false::operators> then//Because this will always be false, no matter what, then again, you don't need this.
...//Just delete this script; it's completely useless.
end

I understand your reasoning slightly more now however there definitely are applications for these blocks. A simple example includes the following.

define move (steps) steps, bounce? <bounce>
    move (steps) steps
    if <bounce :: custom> then
        if on edge, bounce
    end

When calling the block, we're forced to use the following method.

move (10) steps, bounce? <not <>> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <> :: custom

Instead of…

move (10) steps, bounce? <true :: operators> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <false :: operators> :: custom

It seems a little silly, doesn't it?

DaSpudLord wrote:

Gaza101 wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

if <true::operators> then//Because this will always be true, no matter what, then you don't need this if block.
...//Just place this outside of the if block and delete the if block.
end

if <false::operators> then//Because this will always be false, no matter what, then again, you don't need this.
...//Just delete this script; it's completely useless.
end

I understand your reasoning slightly more now however there definitely are applications for these blocks. A simple example includes the following.

define move (steps) steps, bounce? <bounce>
    move (steps) steps
    if <bounce :: custom> then
        if on edge, bounce
    end

When calling the block, we're forced to use the following method.

move (10) steps, bounce? <not <>> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <> :: custom

Instead of…

move (10) steps, bounce? <true :: operators> :: custom
move (10) steps, bounce? <false :: operators> :: custom

It seems a little silly, doesn't it?

Not really. In fact, for inputing true, it actually saves a step.

when green flag clicked
broadcast [I'm just going to leave slowly]


when I receive [I'm just going to leave slowly]
forever
    
move (-1) steps
wait (0.1) secs
end

14917 wrote:

when green flag clicked
broadcast [I'm just going to leave slowly]


when I receive [I'm just going to leave slowly]
forever
    
move (-1) steps
wait (0.1) secs
end

-Cherri- wrote:

Can people stop necroposting? -_-

-Cherri- wrote:

Can people stop necroposting? -_-

DaSpudLord wrote:

I was thinking that when you view a project, if you don't have flash installed, underneath of the “install flash” message there should be a link to run the project in Phosphorous. That way I can easily launch a project from my tablet despite not having flash installed.