Workarounds to Commonly Suggested Blocks

Sheep_tester

Ninkancho wrote:
masonepiclow27 wrote:
Well whats a workaround???
i have no idea
A set of blocks that provide, more or less, the same functionality as another single block. For instance,
set x to (0)
set y to (0)
is a workaround for
go to x: (0) y: (0)

actually that is not a true workaround because the go to block can make a diagonal line when the pen is down; however your workaround makes a strange zig-zag
A better example:

change x by (500)

can be workarounded with

go to x: ((x position) + (500)) y: (y position)

Ninkancho

Yeah that.

BoBoBoBobTrOlL

forever if <> ::control cstart
end

Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?

MClovers

BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?

I remember this

MathlyCat

BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?

Please don't spam.

But yes it was deemed too easy to workaround…

forever
    
if <> then
    
end

end

MegaByteCorporations

MathlyCat wrote:
BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?
Please don't spam.

But yes it was deemed too easy to workaround…
forever
    
if <> then
    
end

end

That's not spam.

MathlyCat

MegaByteCorporations wrote:
MathlyCat wrote:
BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?
Please don't spam.

But yes it was deemed too easy to workaround…
forever
    
if <> then
    
end

end
That's not spam.

Yes it is; no contribution to the topic or in other words Off-Topic discussion.

MegaByteCorporations

MathlyCat wrote:
Yes it is; no contribution to the topic or in other words Off-Topic discussion.

He was noting that

forever if <> ::control cstart
end

Was an actual block, but was removed, which furthers the point that it is easy to workaround.

Last edited by MegaByteCorporations (Feb. 11, 2016 01:00:19)

MathlyCat

MegaByteCorporations wrote:
MathlyCat wrote:
Yes it is; no contribution to the topic or in other words Off-Topic discussion.
He was noting that
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was an actual block, but was removed, which furthers the point that it is easy to workaround.

Still no contribution. You are only pointing out that this block was deemed unnecessary which has no connection to the topic as the OP asks for workarounds not facts about old blocks. I am being sorta hypocritical though; we should be posting workarounds.

nopus

Ehh…

asivi

MathlyCat wrote:
BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?
Please don't spam.

But yes it was deemed too easy to workaround…
forever
    
if <> then
    
end

end

Actually the workaround is

if <> then
forever
    
end

    
end

Regards.

ScratchyDrawing

ollie_manning wrote:
I think scratch should add
(I receive [message])

if <(I receive [message])> then
move (10) steps    
end

It might be useful, but there is a workaround.
For the thing:

when green flag clicked
forever
if <touching [Detector v] ?> then
move (10) steps

    
end


end

For the detector:

when I receive [message v]
go to [thing v]

And there you go. Add that, rollercoasterfan.

alexphan

asivi wrote:
Actually the workaround is
if <> then
forever
    
end

    
end

The forever if block actually doesn't work like that. It will run forever, and it will only do what's inside of it if a condition is true. It does not check if a condition is true, and if so it runs forever.

Sheep_tester

Wouldn't the workaround for

repeat (1) secs::control cstart
end

be

set [mode v] to (0)
broadcast [repeat secs v] and wait
when I receive [repeat secs v]
if <(mode)=[0]>
set [t v] to (((days since 2000)*(86400))+(seconds::grey))
wait until <((days since 2000)*(86400))>(t)>
set [mode v] to [1]
broadcast [repeat secs v]
end
when I receive [repeat secs v]
if <(mode)=[0]>
forever
...
end
end

Because sometimes the script inside the loop will run longer than it is supposed to, like in this situation:

repeat (1) secs::control cstart
wait (2) secs
end

and I'm assuming that the script just stops whatever it is doing when the specified length of time is met. Also your workaround won't work in a situation where the timer is constantly being reset (i.e. for detecting when the project is stopped). Oh, and the loop would go on forever (in workaround #1) if the script inside the loop takes longer than it is supposed to.

futuregodzilla

what about

<color [#00ff00] is touching [sprite] ?>

ScratchyDrawing

futuregodzilla wrote:
what about
<color [#00ff00] is touching [sprite] ?>

We've already got that. Just do it for the sprite instead:

when green flag clicked
if <touching color [#00ff00] ?> then
say [Celebratory Dance! Such an easy script!]
    
end

Ninkancho

Alternately,

...::hat
if <touching color [#0f0] ?> then
broadcast [color () is touching () v]
end

ScratchyDrawing

Ninkancho wrote:

Alternately,

...::hat
if <touching color [#0f0] ?> then
broadcast [color () is touching () v]
end

That's.. like.. exactly what I did.

MathlyCat

1. I have a workaround from Joeythechicken.
(Point x: y

block

Make a sprite and hide it (Maybe call it “Point”), then give it this:

when I receive [Point to... v]
go to x: (pointX) y: (pointY)

Then, in other sprites, you can create a custom block:

define point at x: (number1) y: (number2)
set [pointX v] to (number1)
set [pointY v] to (number2)
broadcast [Point to... v] and wait
point towards [Point v]

Then, whenever you want to use “point at x: y:,” you can do

point at x: () y: () ::custom

2. Are you active? If not this needs to be unstickied!

robert_supermario

BoBoBoBobTrOlL wrote:
forever if <> ::control cstart
end
Was a real thing before it was deemed unnecessary and removed in 2.0.
Am I the only one who remembers this?

i remember, i still have scratch 1.4 offline editor on my computer

Discuss Scratch