Support for the first one.

No support for the last one as for reasons above.

1.support!

2. I'm gonna go against consensus and support. as OP said, the new block will say false if stop is pressed and then the block is run. the workaround will say true in this condition.

stop asking::sensing

We NEED this block so badly!!! Why don't we have it yet???
SUPPORT!

No support for the second one though due to the simple workaround.

if you put:

ask [] and wait//with no text the the string.

Then it will still ask so that's why I support the first one.

support for both

and guys the second one doesn't have all that simple of a workaround, because it requires something like this:

define ask (string) and wait
set [asking v] to [true]
ask (string) and wait
set [asking v] to [false]

define stop asking
set [asking v] to [false]
stop asking :: sensing

<(asking) = [true]>

thats a 7-block workaround all things considered and without custom blocks its even harder

Support for the first.

stop asking::sensing

You know you'd need two separate scripts just for this to work, right?

Alberknyis wrote:

stop asking::sensing

You know you'd need two separate scripts just for this to work, right?

??? Not sure what you mean, could you explain further.

See above post

ask [] and wait

This block, right here. Any blocks under it WILL NOT RUN until it has finished asking.

Therefore, to stop it you'll need a separate script which contains that block.

adding to above post by Alberknyis

not even the “stop all other scripts in sprite” block works against the ask block dialog. maybe that should be fixed?

Zro716 wrote:

not even the “stop all other scripts in sprite” block works against the ask block dialog. maybe that should be fixed?

It… Doesn't? o.O


Edit: Oh. I saw the project XD

You know, this one.

Alberknyis wrote:

See above post

ask [] and wait

This block, right here. Any blocks under it WILL NOT RUN until it has finished asking.

Therefore, to stop it you'll need a separate script which contains that block.

Ahh ok, I understand. Naturally, yes.

Support for both!

support number 1

Support for the first, but I'm not sure about the second one. It has such a simple workaround.

Support all


What about:

stop saying :: looks
saying? :: boolean looks  // maybe sensing
stop thinking :: looks
thinking? :: boolean looks // also maybe sensing

ev3commander wrote:

Support all
What about:

stop saying :: looks
saying? :: boolean looks  // maybe sensing
stop thinking :: looks
thinking? :: boolean looks // also maybe sensing

“Say nothing” actually existed at one point but it was removed due to it's really simple workaround:

say []//Leave empty.

It's a nice idea but for some reason I don't feel like the Scratch Team is going to take you up on it! I think the ask button is just supposed to be a very basic introduction to the user input sort of thing and that it probably won't be expanded upon much further.

ev3commander wrote:

Support all


What about:

stop saying :: looks
saying? :: boolean looks  // maybe sensing
stop thinking :: looks
thinking? :: boolean looks // also maybe sensing

For “stop saying” or “say nothing” you just need to use this block:

say[]//Empty text box.

DevanWolf wrote:

ev3commander wrote:

Support all


What about:

stop saying :: looks
saying? :: boolean looks  // maybe sensing
stop thinking :: looks
thinking? :: boolean looks // also maybe sensing

For “stop saying” or “say nothing” you just need to use this block:

say[]//Empty text box.

I… literally just said that a few posts above.