Discuss Scratch
![[RSS Feed]](http://cdn.scratch.mit.edu/scratchr2/static/__5b3e40ec58a840b41702360e9891321b__//djangobb_forum/img/feed-icon-small.png "[RSS Feed]"){kind=icon}
- Supreme_Scratcher
-
Scratcher
26 posts
A "negative" block
A block that lets you do the opposite of a variable that you have already made.
when green flag clicked
repeat (10)
change y by (jump)
end
repeat (10)
change y by (-(jump))
end
- DaEpikDude
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
You can just use one of these:
((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
- Supreme_Scratcher
-
Scratcher
26 posts
A "negative" block
You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
That is true, but it is still good to know a way around the problem. (I think)
Last edited by Supreme_Scratcher (Nov. 26, 2017 01:51:09)
- FancyFoxy
-
Scratcher
500+ posts
A "negative" block
1. The Move Steps block has a pretty complicated workaround. I was only able to make the workaround because I understood the sin() block.You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
2. This workaround is so simple that it isn't really necessary. If you know that negative numbers exist(which is pretty much everyone), you would know that you can just subtract the number from 0.
- walkcycle
-
Scratcher
500+ posts
A "negative" block
Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.
Yes, it is.
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
The criteria to add a block to Scratch is not the same as to remove a block.
- Charles12310
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
1. I disagree depending on how the workaround is. If the workaround seems simple and nice then the unexistent block is not needed.Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.
Yes, it is.The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
The criteria to add a block to Scratch is not the same as to remove a block.
2. And did you see anything that mentions criteria about removing a block?
Anyways, you could just do this:
((0) - (number))
Note that if you use a negative number in this reporter then it will report a positive number depending on how positive and negative numbers.
Last edited by Charles12310 (Nov. 26, 2017 03:48:33)
- blac8dacube_030
-
Scratcher
70 posts
A "negative" block
You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
actully the move block is is not the same as change x or change y it moves in the derection of where the sprite is pionting and even though i think there might be a way to work around it but alot of new scratcher might not be able to figure out how to do it
Last edited by blac8dacube_030 (Nov. 26, 2017 12:35:56)
- Sigton
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
actully the move block is is not the same as change x or change y it moves in the derection of where the sprite is pionting and even though i think there might be a way to work around it but alot of new scratcher might not be able to figure out how to do itExactly- adding the block makes it easier for people that might not know the workaround.
Sigton
- mystery4000
-
Scratcher
100+ posts
A "negative" block
No support, it requires no effort to make the work around for this block, young scratchers could easily make the work around
- Charles12310
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.1. It is valid in some cases, and unvalid in others.
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
2. Maybe you should support your claim with a block that has a complicated workaround instead of an easy workaround.
- DaEpikDude
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
*invalidJust because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.1. It is valid in some cases, and unvalid in others.
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
2. Maybe you should support your claim with a block that has a complicated workaround instead of an easy workaround.
- -ShadowOfTheFuture-
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
No support. The workaround is so simple.
The move block workaround involves sines and cosines. You can't expect an average third grader to understand trigonometry.
On the other hand, the workaround for a negative block is so simple I'm pretty sure a first grader could understand it.
You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
The move block workaround involves sines and cosines. You can't expect an average third grader to understand trigonometry.
On the other hand, the workaround for a negative block is so simple I'm pretty sure a first grader could understand it.
- awsome_guy_360
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
No support, it can be easily worked around with above solutions.
Last edited by awsome_guy_360 (Nov. 26, 2017 20:29:12)
- Tymewalk
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
No support, as this block wouldn't give anything one of the above workarounds wouldn't already give.
Even still, the only reason people use that workaround is because it's posted on the Wiki. I doubt that everyone would suddenly just easily make “move () steps” workarounds. I agree that we can't just say “no support, there's a workaround” for everything, but this is clearly a case when the workaround is far better than adding a block.No support. The workaround is so simple.Trigonometry is taught at third grade, so it's reasonable to expect third graders to understand tirgonometry.You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
The move block workaround involves sines and cosines. You can't expect an average third grader to understand trigonometry.
On the other hand, the workaround for a negative block is so simple I'm pretty sure a first grader could understand it.
- FancyFoxy
-
Scratcher
500+ posts
A "negative" block
No support, there are three single block workarounds.That doesn't really work because negating a negative number will make the value “–1.” That's not really a thing.
The ones already provided plus(join [-] (var))
The other one-block workarounds will work.
- walkcycle
-
Scratcher
500+ posts
A "negative" block
And did you see anything that mentions criteria about removing a block?The post responded to asks
why don't we remove that?
- awsome_guy_360
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
No support, there are three single block workarounds.That doesn't really work because negating a negative number will make the value “–1.” That's not really a thing.
The ones already provided plus(join [-] (var))
The other one-block workarounds will work.
Oh wups, my bad. Didn't see that.
- Supreme_Scratcher
-
Scratcher
26 posts
A "negative" block
*sigh*
I just wanted to make a suggestion, not an argument thread.
-_-
I just wanted to make a suggestion, not an argument thread.
-_-
- braxbroscratcher
-
Scratcher
1000+ posts
A "negative" block
because the move steps block has a MUCH more drawn out workaround involving complex trig functions - I used the workaround to make rotating grids at one point.You can just use one of these:Just because there is a workaround isn't a valid reason for not supporting.((0) - (something))No support: it's a one block workaround.
((something) * (-1))
The move steps block has a workaround, why don't we remove that?
No support, this is a simple one block workaround, you don't even need to type anything:
(() - (var))you don't need to type because the subtraction block's default state is this:
(() - ())
so yea, no support
Last edited by braxbroscratcher (Nov. 27, 2017 14:28:36)