it pretty much self-explainatory. this block would be really useful for a multitude of reasons.

wait () seconds or until <>

XnneoScratch wrote:

it pretty much self-explainatory. this block would be really useful for a multitude of reasons.

wait () seconds or until <>

workaround thats not really hard to do

reset timer
repeat until <<(time) > (your length)> or <your condition here ::sensing>>
set [time v] to (timer ::sensing)
end

kinda long but still possible

Malicondi wrote:

XnneoScratch wrote:

it pretty much self-explainatory. this block would be really useful for a multitude of reasons.

wait () seconds or until <>

workaround thats not really hard to do

reset timer
repeat until <<(time) > (your length)> or <your condition here ::sensing>>
set [time v] to (timer ::sensing)
end

kinda long but still possible

if you were already using timer just use

set [timer v] to [0]

and in a seperate

when green flag clicked
forever
wait (0.01) secs
change [timer v] by [0.01]end

so no support

wait until <(desired time) < (timer)>

This is an easy and efficient way to perform the script you asked, a clean line.

#3 - At each loop step you get more and more you lose precision.
As a clean workaround you can use the (days since 2000) block and timestamp but it's a bit hard to understand it

So support

XnneoScratch wrote:

it pretty much self-explainatory. this block would be really useful for a multitude of reasons.

wait () seconds or until <>

It is simple, but there is an alternative to create the same code. It's longer but it still exists making a block like this would mean people would have less of a real challenge to crate the same code with a different look.