I've been in the situation so many times when I make an “if” statement complete with a condition and some blocks inside it, only to realise that an “if/else” statement would be much more appropriate. But to make the switch, I have to remove the condition, remove the blocks inside the statement, add the if/else block and add back the blocks that were in the “if” statement. In practice, this exchange only takes about 10 seconds, but if you're like me and you constantly fail to think ahead, it does get annoying to constantly make this change, and I've thought of a simple shortcut that could be added to make our lives easier.

In the same way that you can switch from the () + () block to the () - () block, the switch would be made by right-clicking the “if” block and from the menu that appears, there is the option “if/else” as shown:


The “if” block would then “grow” into an “if/else” block.

If you right click on an “if/else” block and want to turn it back into an “if” block, then any blocks that were in the “else” section would “pop” out, just like reporter and boolean blocks pop out if you place another reporter/boolean on top of it.

This same idea can also be used to turn “<<> and <>>” blocks into “<<> or <>>” blocks and vice versa as well as switching between “hide” and “show” blocks.

Definite support

Support!

I indeed fortify this indubitable plan.

+support

YES, nothing worse than passing loads of stuff from an if to an if/else….

ZUMG. YES. Mainly because the other blocks do that…

Support

This would be a good idea

Yes, there should be lots more “switch this block”-style menus. Such as show/hide.

blob8108 wrote:

Yes, there should be lots more “switch this block”-style menus. Such as show/hide.

Ah yes, that's a good one.

Definately! I always have to move it out and into the new loop.

Support!

Support!

i haven't supported this yet? support!

I was thinking the same thing! +support!

I see this as very useful, support.

support

bump because someone else just suggested this