No.

Easy fix:

when green flag clicked
set [var v] to (pick random (0) to (1))
if <(var) = [0]> then
broadcast [Do Stuff v]
end
if <(var) = [1]> then //You can put this stuff in 'else' too. :)
broadcast [Do Other Stuff v]
end

k9lego wrote:

Easy fix:

when green flag clicked
set [var v] to (pick random (0) to (1))
if <(var) = [0]> then
broadcast [Do Stuff v]
end
if <(var) = [1]> then //You can put this stuff in 'else' too. :)
broadcast [Do Other Stuff v]
end

no like this

forever
 if <>
...
end    
end

this?

when green flag clicked
forever if <[yes] = [no]>
    ...
end

too much work to figure out

forever
    
if <> then
    
end
end

or

if <> then
forever
    
end
    
end

Is it just me or does this belong in the “questions about scratch” forums?

s_federici wrote:

Dear Scratch Team,
I found several discussions about the “Forever If” block having disappeared from the Control blocks:

• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/9989/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/20438/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19926/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19617/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19309/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/8879/
  
• http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/7264/
  

But I couldn't find any official answer from the Scratch Team about the Forever If block. Will it ever be back? If not, why?

I think the “Forever If” block is a great tool to smoothly introduce to computer programming those students to whom computer science was not a primary interest (that is, an incredibly high number of students). By using Scratch and by using this block they can acquire all the necessary skills step-by-step without having to worry about I-will-never-remember-this problems (problems with which Scratch copes very well thanks to the under-your-eyes blocks palette). They don't want to remember which are the two blocks that build the “Forever If effect”. They don't want to remember which between the two blocks must be put inside (or under?) the other one. They simply want to think-and-build, not to remember which is the solution suggested by their teacher. And Scratch allows exacly this.

Some people think that the Forever If block is redundant. But this can't be a problem: Scratch loves redundancy. There are so many redundant Scratch blocks that having another one cannot be a problem.

Some people think that the Forever If block is vague. But I can state that my students would like to use just that block. And that their 1.4 projects works very well.

Some people said that the Forever If block doesn't work in 2.0. I can't say anything about this: every 1.4 project containing the Forever If block is automatically translated to Forever + If. I don't understand why the “Forever If” block shouldn't work in 2.0. It used to work very well in 1.4.

So, I would like to know from the Scratch Team what is the official reason why the block is gone in 2.0

Thanks for your attention

I am on your side because the forever if block was much easier then having to place down two separate blocks. What if you were making a massive project with heaps of what used to be forever if blocks but instead you have to place down one of these two block contraptions also would you like to do a collab

forever
    
if <> then
    
end
end

WASDgamer wrote:

Is it just me or does this belong in the “questions about scratch” forums?

Well, I think they are making a suggestion to bring back the forever if block.

The Scratch Team HAS give an official answer (somewhere). They said it was because the block was a bit confusing to New Scratchers, as you pointed out. When I started Scratching beck in 1.4, I avoided the block because I was unsure about what exactly it does. Eventually I realized and started using it.

I don't think we need it back, though. I'll probably get hate for this, because it's a controversial subject over a small thing with few advantages and disadvantages. What I say is, the Scratch Team has spoken, and I don't feel the need to have the block back.

Failord wrote:

The Scratch Team HAS give an official answer (somewhere)

This is what everyone says. Unfortunately I cannot find any trace of this official decision.

Failord wrote:

What I say is, the Scratch Team has spoken, and I don't feel the need to have the block back.

I appreciate your opinion. All I can do is bringing it back in the offline editor for my students in order to make their learning easier (when the source code will be available…). I already did in Jen's Snap.

I think it was on the old Scratch Suggestions site, which has now been removed.

scimonster wrote:

I think it was on the old Scratch Suggestions site, which has now been removed.

My opinion is that is was a real bad suggestion. It would have been enough to rename it to something more clear, such as for example “every time that … do …”.

Well, when the Scratch 2.0 source code is released, someone can make a mod with it that exports to .sb2.

That actually isn't too bad of an idea…

never will be added back
here are two work arounds with different purposes
This one forever checks for a condition and if it returns true does what's inside the if block.

forever
    
if <> then
    
end
end

This one checks for the condition ONCE, and if it returns true it will carry out the forever block.

if <> then
    
forever
    
end
end

VoltageGames wrote:

never will be added back
here are two work arounds with different purposes
This one forever checks for a condition and if it returns true does what's inside the if block.

forever
    
if <> then
    
end
end

This one checks for the condition ONCE, and if it returns true it will carry out the forever block.

if <> then
    
forever
    
end
end

If it will never be added back why not make it more official by putting it in this.
READ THIS BEFORE SUGGESTING ANYTHING

they-might-be-cats wrote:

If it will never be added back why not make it more official by putting it in this.
READ THIS BEFORE SUGGESTING ANYTHING

I agree that, if the ST thinks that the block won't be added back to Scratch anymore, it could be added to the list. But maybe not so many people are really interested in it and no one (other than me and a few other scratchers) is asking for putting it back. So they are not really annoyed by this requests

Anyway, until the the topic is in the list, there is still hope for me

s_federici wrote:

they-might-be-cats wrote:

If it will never be added back why not make it more official by putting it in this.
READ THIS BEFORE SUGGESTING ANYTHING

I agree that, if the ST thinks that the block won't be added back to Scratch anymore, it could be added to the list. But maybe not so many people are really interested in it and no one (other than me and a few other scratchers) is asking for putting it back. So they are not really annoyed by this requests

Anyway, until the the topic is in the list, there is still hope for me

It is unlikely that the block will be coming back anytime soon.

I guess it's time to add it to the list?

jvvg wrote:

See the Wiki article, where it says “Due to the block's simplicity to recreate, that it has less functionality than the replication (you cannot stack multiple If () blocks inside the Forever If () block), and that new Scratchers sometimes confuse it with the Repeat Until () block, there have been many campaigns to remove the block. Eventually in 2.0, the block was removed. The block had an advantage, though: it runs some milliseconds faster than its replication, so it could be used to combat extreme lag. ”

Right. It is used to fight lag.