Also, if it is text-based, then one can use Ctrl+F to search, which you currently cannot in block-based scratch - although in the sneak peek of Scratch 3, it seems to be different, idk.

I don't understand: Scratch is already a programming language, why have two versions of it?

moshe2 wrote:

Honeybee_ wrote:

I realize that part of Scratch's purpose is to use blocks to learn how to code, but when projects get script-heavy with a lot of sprites and assets, it gets super hard to navigate the workspace and edit complicated code without accidentally messing things up.

It also makes it harder for other Scratchers to view other people's complex projects, because they don't know where this function or that piece of code is located.

Therefore, I believe that Scratch should introduce a strictly optional text version of code. (Meaning that it will still be largely focused on the blocks).

What do you think? Give me feedback.

SUPPORT

Please, state WHY you support.

Botcho_Otkho wrote:

I don't understand: Scratch is already a programming language, why have two versions of it?

moshe2 wrote:

Honeybee_ wrote:

I realize that part of Scratch's purpose is to use blocks to learn how to code, but when projects get script-heavy with a lot of sprites and assets, it gets super hard to navigate the workspace and edit complicated code without accidentally messing things up.

It also makes it harder for other Scratchers to view other people's complex projects, because they don't know where this function or that piece of code is located.

Therefore, I believe that Scratch should introduce a strictly optional text version of code. (Meaning that it will still be largely focused on the blocks).

What do you think? Give me feedback.

SUPPORT

Please, state WHY you support.

Because I had suggested it also and if my idea will be rejected as a duplicate, I should support someone who has the same one.

Bump

Bump bump

moshe2 wrote:

Because I had suggested it also and if my idea will be rejected as a duplicate, I should support someone who has the same one.

Still, you have to write why.

Botcho_Otkho wrote:

moshe2 wrote:

Because I had suggested it also and if my idea will be rejected as a duplicate, I should support someone who has the same one.

Still, you have to write why.

It allows for better, more similar practice to more advanced languages.
It would be compatible with more applications.
There are some things (like a straightforward searching) that could be done with text that could not be with blocks.

Support, copying and pasting repetive parts of code would be easier (I hate that about block based code)

if <Awoken> then
    
set [Your health v] to [ 0]
end

SuperHal989 wrote:

Support, copying and pasting repetive parts of code would be easier (I hate that about block based code)

Thanks!

Please don't add (CONTROVERSIAL) to the title, because that's clickbait.
Also Duplicate.

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

Please don't add (CONTROVERSIAL) to the title, because that's clickbait.
Also Duplicate.

You've been already ninja'd by @Sheep_maker

KJRYoshi07 wrote:

Please don't add (CONTROVERSIAL) to the title, because that's clickbait.
Also Duplicate.

Thanks for the link! It does look like this is a duplicate topic so I'll close it to keep the conversation all in one place.

Please use the existing topic in the link above.