makethebrainhappy wrote:

Hi?

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Hi?

pianogirl84 wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Hi?

Salutations

(I feel like I'm not really contributing to this discussion anymore… I've read everything but usually I don't know how to respond )

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

-Lite- wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

Dynamic signatures are cool now (albeit in violation of the TOU, which is why I do not partake). If you could write a script to generate the images, that would be best.

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

Dynamic signatures are cool now (albeit in violation of the TOU, which is why I do not partake). If you could write a script to generate the images, that would be best.

Violation of the TOU?

-Lite- wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

Dynamic signatures are cool now (albeit in violation of the TOU, which is why I do not partake). If you could write a script to generate the images, that would be best.

Violation of the TOU?

Hacked blocks break the TOU, too.
Furthermore, the ST has removed them previously. They have ultimate control over what is allowed, and have previously removed dynamic signatures as they utilize a security vulnerability. The current one uses a vulnerability in the wikimedia, a whitelisted domain, allowing traffic to be redirected to prohibited (not-whitelisted) sites for serving image content.

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

Dynamic signatures are cool now (albeit in violation of the TOU, which is why I do not partake). If you could write a script to generate the images, that would be best.

Violation of the TOU?

Hacked blocks break the TOU, too.
Furthermore, the ST has removed them previously. They have ultimate control over what is allowed, and have previously removed dynamic signatures as they utilize a security vulnerability. The current one uses a vulnerability in the wikimedia, a whitelisted domain, allowing traffic to be redirected to prohibited (not-whitelisted) sites for serving image content.

This one uses cubeupload which is an approved hosting site…

-Lite- wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

-Lite- wrote:

makethebrainhappy wrote:

Would people like signatures like this?


http://i.cubeupload.com/hDG7OL.png

Dynamic signatures are cool now (albeit in violation of the TOU, which is why I do not partake). If you could write a script to generate the images, that would be best.

Violation of the TOU?

Hacked blocks break the TOU, too.
Furthermore, the ST has removed them previously. They have ultimate control over what is allowed, and have previously removed dynamic signatures as they utilize a security vulnerability. The current one uses a vulnerability in the wikimedia, a whitelisted domain, allowing traffic to be redirected to prohibited (not-whitelisted) sites for serving image content.

This one uses cubeupload which is an approved hosting site…

I'm talking about dynamic signatures, not cubeupload. I was saying that it would be more popular if he made it dynamic, however it wouldn't technically be allowed.

-Lite- wrote:

Since we don't seem to be doing anything, I'll proceed.


What is refactoring?
According to wikipedia:

Code refactoring is the process of restructuring existing computer code—changing the factoring—without changing its external behavior. Refactoring improves nonfunctional attributes of the software.

When we refactor a project, we are improving the code, without changing the external behavior. This allows a project to run faster and more smoothly.

How can I refactor?
You can add small improvements that will improve your project, and eliminate unnecessary code.
Examples of improvements: https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/795672/

Faster less than or equal to and greater than or equal to relational expressions
You probably have seen, or even used this:

<<[x] < [y]> or <[x] = [y]>>

However, this is not optimal, because it requires scratch to calculate a check twice, and then apply an OR relational operation.
The better form is:

<not <[x] > [y]>>

Why? A check only has to be done once.
If you didn't already know, the opposite of less than is greater than or equal to, and the opposite of greater than is less than or equal to.
Why?
<insert simplified explanation here>
Faster not operation
For a demo, see https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/61323708/
Replacing

if <not <>> then

end

with

if <> then 

  

else

end

will increase performance.

Including the example above,

if <<[x] < [y]> or <[x] = [y]>> then
...
end

Can be optimized to

if <[x] > [y]> then
else
...
end

When using both optimizations, a 10-15% average increase in speed was observed without turbo, and about 50% with turbo. I would encourage you to test this yourself.

monkeytrooper wrote:

I'd like to get involved.