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

Nambaseking01

Mr_PenguinAlex wrote:
everyone's just saying that there's workarounds and it can be abused for lag without reading the entire op

this is nothing out of the ordinary for the suggestions forum to be honest

I'm suspecting that people who post here don't know what “reading” and “understanding” mean - they'll have to pay a revisit to Merriam-Webster one day.

EpicGhoul993

Am I the only “constructive and questioning” supporter read the entire OP and discussion?

Since people seem to post without reading anything.

cooldude-222

Nambaseking01 wrote:
Mr_PenguinAlex wrote:
everyone's just saying that there's workarounds and it can be abused for lag without reading the entire op

this is nothing out of the ordinary for the suggestions forum to be honest

I'm suspecting that people who post here don't know what “reading” and “understanding” mean - they'll have to pay a revisit to Merriam-Webster one day.

maybe some should link to the definitions and red should change the title to understand the op

xXRedTheCoderXx

cooldude-222 wrote:
Nambaseking01 wrote:
Mr_PenguinAlex wrote:
everyone's just saying that there's workarounds and it can be abused for lag without reading the entire op

this is nothing out of the ordinary for the suggestions forum to be honest

I'm suspecting that people who post here don't know what “reading” and “understanding” mean - they'll have to pay a revisit to Merriam-Webster one day.
maybe some should link to the definitions and red should change the title to understand the op

Done.

cooldude-222

Nice

cooldude-222

EpicGhoul993 wrote:
Am I the only “constructive and questioning” supporter read the entire OP and discussion?
Since people seem to post without reading anything.

no your not the only on there are a few others.

Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts

scratch978654

Changing to 80% support, not 100% because of the way it can be misleading (it doesn't actually run two scripts at the same time)

xXRedTheCoderXx

scratch978654 wrote:
Changing to 80% support, not 100% because of the way it can be misleading (it doesn't actually run two scripts at the same time)

Well because that is impossible. And there shouldn't be any issues just because there's a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001 second difference in between the running of 2 blocks, unless you're purposely trying to cause issues.

Last edited by xXRedTheCoderXx (Sept. 12, 2020 14:50:38)

scratch978654

xXRedTheCoderXx wrote:
scratch978654 wrote:
Changing to 80% support, not 100% because of the way it can be misleading (it doesn't actually run two scripts at the same time)
Well because that is impossible. And there shouldn't be any issues just because there's a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001 second difference in between the running of 2 blocks, unless you're purposely trying to cause issues.

What about overwriting variables?

cooldude-222

it will do the bottom one

xXRedTheCoderXx

scratch978654 wrote:
xXRedTheCoderXx wrote:
scratch978654 wrote:
Changing to 80% support, not 100% because of the way it can be misleading (it doesn't actually run two scripts at the same time)
Well because that is impossible. And there shouldn't be any issues just because there's a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001 second difference in between the running of 2 blocks, unless you're purposely trying to cause issues.
What about overwriting variables?

Like I said, that can really only happen when you're purposely trying to cause issues. And also, like I said, it is literally impossible to change a variable twice at the exact time. What do you expect the output to be?

EpicGhoul993

cooldude-222 wrote:
Sorry, you have to wait 60 seconds between posts

[Offtopic]Oof rip[/Offtopic]

Anyway, there actually is a quite acceptable workaround, BUT if you use many block combinations there will be lots of duplicated codes.

broadcast [run 1 and 2 v]

when I receive [run 1 and 2 v]
block 1 ::custom

when I receive [run 1 and 2 v]
block 2 ::custom

And, I don't say I give this a No Support,

EpicGhoul993 wrote:
Support.

I only want to point out how the workaround given is not very affective compared to the suggestion block.

Mountains of broadcast
Let's say you are making a wayyyy complex game, and you are forced to have several script parts to run at once. Imagine you having to make 10 broadcasts exactly like the one I give above… you know.
Screen refeshing
As I recently read from a Scratch HWS topic,
[…]boardcasts force the screen to refresh, while cusrom blocks with the tick on “run without screen refresh” don't.
that leads to some scary times where you do stuff really fast and don't want the player to, like, see the character runs everywhere on the screen, but the refresh ruins everything and you are left scratching your head on how to hide it from the player again.

Here's my opinions on the workaround. Please think before posting “ThErE's A wOrKaRoUnD1!!1!!111!”, and be constructive on the topic.

scratch978654

xXRedTheCoderXx wrote:
scratch978654 wrote:
xXRedTheCoderXx wrote:
scratch978654 wrote:
Changing to 80% support, not 100% because of the way it can be misleading (it doesn't actually run two scripts at the same time)
Well because that is impossible. And there shouldn't be any issues just because there's a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001 second difference in between the running of 2 blocks, unless you're purposely trying to cause issues.
What about overwriting variables?
Like I said, that can really only happen when you're purposely trying to cause issues. And also, like I said, it is literally impossible to change a variable twice at the exact time. What do you expect the output to be?

Well, if you're trying to simulate custom reporters and use a return variable…

dimayajonelcid

Sometimes when making fan-made Open Hexagon levels, I just want to stop the script in the simplest way possible. This is what it looks like to stop the script (using the suggested block).

do {
...
} while doing {
if <...> then
stop [this script v]
end
}

And yes, it's impossible to use broadcasts to do this.
The block isn't the right color though

ShyGamer16

This is a brilliant idea, Red! I'm glad you thought of it.

I have this problem all the time. Making 2 separate scripts to do this bugs me a lot. Especially with define blocks. I support!

Oh, and another reason:
WE NEED MORE E-BLOCKS!!
So far we only have one:

if <> then 

  

else

end

Who agrees with me? Lol

cooldude-222

ShyGamer16 wrote:
WE NEED MORE E-BLOCKS!!
So far we only have one:
if <> then 

  

else

end
Who agrees with me? Lol

So true

leahcimto

Support, I have needed this so many times and it would be so helpful for custom blocks

Last edited by leahcimto (Sept. 12, 2020 21:54:23)

cooldude-222

leahcimto wrote:
Support, I have needed this so many times and it would be so helpful for custom blocks

please be constructive

DARKTHUNDER11

WORKAROUND:
message split.
Broadcast mmessage.
Have 2 scripts recieve it at the same time.

Ihatr

cooldude-222 wrote:
leahcimto wrote:
Support, I have needed this so many times and it would be so helpful for custom blocks
please be constructive

How is this not constructive?

Discuss Scratch