"Run, and run" E block (READ THE ENTIRE OP BEFORE POSTING)

cooldude-222

j3r0_plays wrote:
No support.
Workaround is to send a broadcast, easy, right?

Did you read the OP?

j3r0_plays

cooldude-222 wrote:
j3r0_plays wrote:
No support.
Workaround is to send a broadcast, easy, right?

Did you read the OP?

Yes. This is useless.

This just shows how lazy most of scratch users are, making like 58 variables aint a problem for me.

Last edited by j3r0_plays (July 28, 2020 04:16:02)

cooldude-222

j3r0_plays wrote:
cooldude-222 wrote:
j3r0_plays wrote:
No support.
Workaround is to send a broadcast, easy, right?

Did you read the OP?
Yes. This is useless.

This just shows how lazy most of scratch users are, making like 58 variables aint a problem for me.

The point is for my blocks and 58 variables would lag out scratch.

j3r0_plays

cooldude-222 wrote:
j3r0_plays wrote:
cooldude-222 wrote:
j3r0_plays wrote:
No support.
Workaround is to send a broadcast, easy, right?

Did you read the OP?
Yes. This is useless.

This just shows how lazy most of scratch users are, making like 58 variables aint a problem for me.
The point is for my blocks and 58 variables would lag out scratch.

Only with a potatoPC. Dont imagine excuses, imagine programs and stop asking for something that you would need, when you dont.

ContourLines

j3r0_plays wrote:
~snip~
Only with a potatoPC. Dont imagine excuses, imagine programs and stop asking for something that you would need, when you dont.

a. Please, your being very rude and impolite.
b. This is in other programming languages, it's called synchronous coding.
c. How would people find it confusing? It's like telling someone to pat their head and rub their tummy at the same time.
d. People aren't being ‘lazy’, this can help improve Scratch. It would probably help younger kids learning to code understand how to have 2 programs run at once.
e. Broadcasts aren't a great workaround, it can get messy as the number of messages piles up and there is almost certainly a very short time delay. It isn't going to work well in MyBlocks if someone needs it to run it without screen-refresh because, like all the other code, it will run at normal speed, slowing down the runtime. And you can't just make another script for the MyBlock, you can't duplicate a define block.
f. Just because it might not be in other programming languages (if synchronous coding didn't exist) doesn't make it ‘non-educational’, lots of Scratch's blocks are unique to Scratch. People will still understand how code is working.

Last edited by ContourLines (July 28, 2020 06:18:20)

Byron_Inc

ContourLines wrote:
f. Just because it might not be in other programming languages (if synchronous coding didn't exist) doesn't make it ‘non-educational’, lots of Scratch's blocks are unique to Scratch. People will still understand how code is working.

Very true. This includes sprites, which don't see any in JavaScript, and possibly not in any other programming languages.

And back to the OP, SUPPORT! This is very useful for me, when I used 80 messy broadcasts in an animation, and more than 20 of them are purely dedicated to walk animations that are used at the same time as gliding them.
But here's a problem. What will it do when one of the scripts are done and another isn't?

j3r0_plays

ContourLines wrote:
j3r0_plays wrote:
~snip~
Only with a potatoPC. Dont imagine excuses, imagine programs and stop asking for something that you would need, when you dont.
a. Please, your being very rude and impolite.
b. This is in other programming languages, it's called synchronous coding.
c. How would people find it confusing? It's like telling someone to pat their head and rub their tummy at the same time.
d. People aren't being ‘lazy’, this can help improve Scratch. It would probably help younger kids learning to code understand how to have 2 programs run at once.
e. Broadcasts aren't a great workaround, it can get messy as the number of messages piles up and there is almost certainly a very short time delay. It isn't going to work well in MyBlocks if someone needs it to run it without screen-refresh because, like all the other code, it will run at normal speed, slowing down the runtime. And you can't just make another script for the MyBlock, you can't duplicate a define block.
f. Just because it might not be in other programming languages (if synchronous coding didn't exist) doesn't make it ‘non-educational’, lots of Scratch's blocks are unique to Scratch. People will still understand how code is working.

So, a better suggestion would be like a variable/broadcast search feature and improvements to scratch runtime. Not a block you could probably have use once, if eaven that. This isnt useful and i dont want that. I make stuff that probably could have used it, but no.

ContourLines

j3r0_plays wrote:
~snip~
So, a better suggestion would be like a variable/broadcast search feature and improvements to scratch runtime. Not a block you could probably have use once, if eaven that. This isnt useful and i dont want that. I make stuff that probably could have used it, but no.

Bottom line: this E block would make things easier for younger children. Please stop recalling the workaround, everyone knows about it already, however, kids just starting up might understand this proposed block than a broadcasting system.

DarthVader4Life

I'm getting real sick and tired of people saying “No support, there's a workaround.” Very rarely does a block get removed because of a workaround. so rare in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor, apparently users didn't understand it either. and because a block has a workaround DOESN'T mean it shouldn't be added. so if you could kindly read this, that'd be great.

HTML-Fan

DarthVader4Life wrote:
in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor

In fact, that wasn't even really a factor. It was the confusion.

DarthVader4Life

HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor
In fact, that wasn't even really a factor. It was the confusion.

really? i thought it was a combo.

cooldude-222

DarthVader4Life wrote:
I'm getting real sick and tired of people saying “No support, there's a workaround.” Very rarely does a block get removed because of a workaround. so rare in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor, apparently users didn't understand it either. and because a block has a workaround DOESN'T mean it shouldn't be added. so if you could kindly read this, that'd be great.

You are so right there are so many blocks already in scratch that have workarounds but still make scratch easier an example is if else.

HTML-Fan

DarthVader4Life wrote:
really? i thought it was a combo.

Well, kinda. I mean, you wouldn't remove a confusing block if it has an extremely long workaround, would you? But it wasn't like “You're too lazy to stick an if into a forever”, it was more like “Forever if is confusing and since you can replace it easily with a simple and way less confusing workaround, we can remove it”.

DarthVader4Life

cooldude-222 wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
I'm getting real sick and tired of people saying “No support, there's a workaround.” Very rarely does a block get removed because of a workaround. so rare in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor, apparently users didn't understand it either. and because a block has a workaround DOESN'T mean it shouldn't be added. so if you could kindly read this, that'd be great.
You are so right there are so many blocks already in scratch that have workarounds but still make scratch easier an example is if else.

here's some more examples.

change x by ()
change y by ()
next costume
next backdrop
when [ v] key pressed
forever

end
wait until <>
(() - (0))
change [ v] by (0)

Last edited by DarthVader4Life (July 28, 2020 15:10:44)

DarthVader4Life

HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
really? i thought it was a combo.
Well, kinda. I mean, you wouldn't remove a confusing block if it has an extremely long workaround, would you? But it wasn't like “You're too lazy to stick an if into a forever”, it was more like “Forever if is confusing and since you can replace it easily with a simple and way less confusing workaround, we can remove it”.

which is why i said that it wasn't the only factor.

HTML-Fan

DarthVader4Life wrote:
HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
really? i thought it was a combo.
Well, kinda. I mean, you wouldn't remove a confusing block if it has an extremely long workaround, would you? But it wasn't like “You're too lazy to stick an if into a forever”, it was more like “Forever if is confusing and since you can replace it easily with a simple and way less confusing workaround, we can remove it”.
which is why i said that it wasn't the only factor.

Kinda. I mean, if it wasn't confusing, it would stay although it has an easy workaround.

DarthVader4Life

HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
really? i thought it was a combo.
Well, kinda. I mean, you wouldn't remove a confusing block if it has an extremely long workaround, would you? But it wasn't like “You're too lazy to stick an if into a forever”, it was more like “Forever if is confusing and since you can replace it easily with a simple and way less confusing workaround, we can remove it”.
which is why i said that it wasn't the only factor.
Kinda. I mean, if it wasn't confusing, it would stay although it has an easy workaround.

now that's CoRrect.

cooldude-222

DarthVader4Life wrote:
cooldude-222 wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
I'm getting real sick and tired of people saying “No support, there's a workaround.” Very rarely does a block get removed because of a workaround. so rare in fact, that the only instance of a block getting removed because of a workaround that i am 100% sure happened is the forever if block. even then the extremely simple workaround wasn't the only factor, apparently users didn't understand it either. and because a block has a workaround DOESN'T mean it shouldn't be added. so if you could kindly read this, that'd be great.
You are so right there are so many blocks already in scratch that have workarounds but still make scratch easier an example is if else.
here's some more examples.
change x by ()
change y by ()
next costume
next backdrop
when [ v] key pressed
forever

end
wait until <>
(() - (0))
change [ v] by (0)

Don’t forget

 
If on edge bounce :: motion

HTML-Fan

DarthVader4Life wrote:
now that's CoRrect.

Whatever the typos should mean.

DarthVader4Life

HTML-Fan wrote:
DarthVader4Life wrote:
now that's CoRrect.
Whatever the typos should mean.

Chair of Republic.

Discuss Scratch