{link removed due to inappropriate language. Please only link to webpages with language appropriate for all ages}
Everybody on the other side doesn't like scratch because its like slacking from real programming! I think they'er wrong!
Do you think too?

Dont listen to the roblox community, this here is a community that majority knows how to program, roblox is a community where majority think they know what they are talking about…..

And yes, scratch is deeply related to real world programming, just in a drag and drop fashion

So? It's fine. Scratch is REAL programming too. It's just simpler. Btw I like some of the new blocks! Like the cloning ones and the define blocks. Makes scratch a whole lot less of a hassle.

{removed by moderator, please use respectful language when commenting}, it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

eaglgenes101 wrote:

{removed}, it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

Keep the language family-friendly.

Roblox has nothing to do with Scratch. They're just jealous that we have a better method of programming.

Well, there are differences between Scratch and other programming languages (notably the fact that it's drag-and-drop so it lacks the component of teaching about syntax and coding etiquette found in your run-of-the-mill text-based programming language). That being said, there are some positives coming out of not having to deal with syntax (the mot common positive being ease of use), and other coding software out there have adopted Scratch's simplistic drag-and-drop fashion - like Google Blocky, Waterbear, and Stencyl, to name a few - for that reason. Some teachers have even found that it's easier to teach students about programing by using Scratch as an introductory tool before jumping to another language, and there have been a handful of Scratchers here who managed to do that on their own.

That being said, Scratch isn't for everybody, as no one learns about programming the same way. And everyone has their opinions on which programming language is best for what kind of project. If someone likes Scratch, they like Scratch; if they don't, well, they don't. No need to push someone into liking Scratch if they prefer another language - and there's no need to for someone to push you into disliking Scratch either.

eaglgenes101 wrote:

{removed by moderator, please use respectful language when commenting}, it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

I wrote a “How To” on that. You can check it out at Point To X,Y (How To: Convert Point To Direction)

The only thing you will need to do is under “Sensing”, choose the <x position of sprite> and <y position of sprite>.

Cheers,
Joshua

cheddargirl wrote:

Well, there are differences between Scratch and other programming languages

I joined the Scratch community about 3 weeks ago to teach my daughters (ages 5 & 7) how to program. They are already amazing their mother with what they are able to do so I see it as a huge success.

As they grow and explore, it is my hope that they get frustrated with the limitations of the language or they run into a hard to diagnose bug which I can use as a teaching aid to explain concepts that would only confuse them now.

At this point, one might think I am drawing the analogy of learning to ride a bike and training wheels. In some ways I am. There are some projects I just would never attempt in Scratch. On the other hand, some of the projects that I have seen people do are mind blowing and, despite having been programming for 20 years, I don't know how I would replicate their results in another language.

I guess if I were to summarize it, this is what I would say:

Scratch is not a general purpose programming language. It targets a younger demographic by abstracting away most impediments in other languages while specializing in visual results. This dichotomy of simple and complex allows people across many strata to create amazing projects. It is incumbent upon the individual to recognize when the limitations of the language become a handicap rather than an enabler.

Cheers,
Joshua

jgatcomb wrote:

cheddargirl wrote:

Well, there are differences between Scratch and other programming languages

I joined the Scratch community about 3 weeks ago to teach my daughters (ages 5 & 7) how to program. They are already amazing their mother with what they are able to do so I see it as a huge success.

As they grow and explore, it is my hope that they get frustrated with the limitations of the language or they run into a hard to diagnose bug which I can use as a teaching aid to explain concepts that would only confuse them now.

At this point, one might think I am drawing the analogy of learning to ride a bike and training wheels. In some ways I am. There are some projects I just would never attempt in Scratch. On the other hand, some of the projects that I have seen people do are mind blowing and, despite having been programming for 20 years, I don't know how I would replicate their results in another language.

I guess if I were to summarize it, this is what I would say:

Scratch is not a general purpose programming language. It targets a younger demographic by abstracting away most impediments in other languages while specializing in visual results. This dichotomy of simple and complex allows people across many strata to create amazing projects. It is incumbent upon the individual to recognize when the limitations of the language become a handicap rather than an enabler.

Cheers,
Joshua

Great description. Although we may not be learning text-based programming from Scratch, it teaches us the concepts and also the mind skills used to solve problems. And what makes Scratch so incredible is how people work around these restrictions to create complex projects. In my opinion, it takes much more skill to create a program in a very restricted language than in one that is more flexible.

blank

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

eaglgenes101 wrote:

{removed}, it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

Keep the language family-friendly.

Roblox has nothing to do with Scratch. They're just jealous that we have a better method of programming.

Lol, I know. Roblox isn't even fun at all.

sanjayraj wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

eaglgenes101 wrote:

{removed}, it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

Keep the language family-friendly.

Roblox has nothing to do with Scratch. They're just jealous that we have a better method of programming.

Lol, I know. Roblox isn't even fun at all.

Only if you don't have minecraft or a console. I have both though ^-^

“other side”
“everyone”

Roblox is neither “everyone else” nor “everyone.” It's fine.

Firedrake969 wrote:

“other side”
“everyone”

Roblox is neither “everyone else” nor “everyone.” It's fine.

Agreed

ZaharaMar wrote:

Firedrake969 wrote:

“other side”
“everyone”

Roblox is neither “everyone else” nor “everyone.” It's fine.

Agreed

above

eaglgenes101 wrote:

it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

point towards [Sprite2 v]
say (direction)

That cheating?

mathfreak231 wrote:

eaglgenes101 wrote:

it's even harder to do some things in scratch. Just try to figure out how to determine the direction to another sprite (no cheating!), and you'll see what I mean.

point towards [Sprite2 v]
say (direction)

That cheating?

Try it with clones…

set [to x v] to (item (target) of [Clone X v])
set [to y v] to (item (target) of [Clone Y v])
set [to dir v] to ([atan v] of (((to x) - (my x)) / (((to y) - (my y)) + (0.00001)))
if <((to y) - (my y)) < [0]>
  change [to dir v] by (180)
end
set [turn v] to ((([sin v] of (to dir)) * ([cos v] of (direction))) - (([sin v] of (direction)) * ([cos v] of (to dir)))