Please allow us to put round blocks (e.g. variables, answer, custom block args, etc.) in the place of variable/list dropdowns

doggy_boi1

ThisIsTemp1 wrote:
doggy_boi1 wrote:
ThisIsTemp1 wrote:
doggy_boi1 wrote:
huwahz wrote:
doggy_boi1 wrote:
Also, how is this too complicated for beginners? even so, they dont have to use it (it's not even a block)
They could find out that they could do that, and think that it will do the same thing as set with the drop-down. They use it, but do not know it doesn't work like that.
btw this is ThisIsTemp's alt
On the off chance that they happen to just accidentally put a variable there, why would they assume that when using variables in any other scenario will result in the value of the variable being the input? If somebody loaded the scratch editor for the first time and was testing variables, why would they even try putting the circle block in a square input? they'd likely use the equation blocks first.

Because majority of the platform are young, or are not at all experienced with programming. When I first saw this I thought of this as the same, although I have been active on Scratch for about 2 years. They could also see it in a advanced project.
but this is how it behaves with every other block, this is how variables just generally work. In this case, you wouldn't even know how variables work anyways.
Then what happens with someone who barely knows about variables who sees this in an advanced project?

they'll just be confused. there's so many advanced features in scratch, nitpicking about something that already exists is pointless.
Not being able to understand something right off the bat is NOT a valid reason to not add a feature. “Too complicated” and “advanced” ( “variable in block” is not advanced, but anyways) are two different things

this is how it behaves with every other block

Last edited by doggy_boi1 (July 24, 2024 23:55:26)

doggy_boi1

oops, i accidentally quoted instead of editing

Last edited by doggy_boi1 (July 24, 2024 23:56:06)

ihavenocluewhythisis

doggy_boi1 wrote:
oops

this is a bit of code in my project

define switch (currency1) to (currency2)
like 6 if <(currency1) =(some currency)> then elses {code} :: control
another 6 if elses {more code}:: control

it is HUGE

if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 

  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 
if <> then 

  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end
  

else

end 

//that is the scale of the if elses (this cant be blockspam because i need to show how big it is) also the if elses are all stacked differently

Last edited by ihavenocluewhythisis (Oct. 20, 2024 20:01:13)

ThisIsTemp1

I would full support if there is a pop-up showing what happens for the first time when you put a reporter block in a dropdown

MrFluffyPenguins

bump because doing stuff with lists is very inefficient if you can't use a variable in place of a list name and i would absolutely love for this to be added after all these years

Last edited by MrFluffyPenguins (Oct. 20, 2024 08:09:02)

medians

Bringing this topic up.

DIsksjw

this topic was requested 9 YEARS ago. PLEASE. this is such a good idea.

AHypnoman

DIsksjw wrote:
this topic was requested 9 YEARS ago. PLEASE. this is such a good idea.

Please don't just state that you want or don't want a feature - explain why or add something else new to the discussion.

MillionOfficial

Support, what if you have a lot of variables/lists?

DIsksjw

AHypnoman wrote:
DIsksjw wrote:
this topic was requested 9 YEARS ago. PLEASE. this is such a good idea.
Please don't just state that you want or don't want a feature - explain why or add something else new to the discussion.

Here's why then - It's been such a pain to make something like, say, drop tables. It would be much easier if I could just do this.

define lootTable (mob name ::custom)
repeat (length of (join (mob name ::custom) [dropTable]) :: list)
et cetera
end

Last edited by DIsksjw (Dec. 8, 2024 00:48:16)

ramenecho

We definitely need this.

AHypnoman

ramenecho wrote:
We definitely need this.

Please don't just state that you want or don't want a feature - explain why or add something else new to the discussion.

helloagain_57

Why? This doesn't have a use AT ALL. It wouldn't be useful for variable rectangle dropdowns, because imagine changing the X position with a variable change.

change (x position) by (0)//cursed

And list rectangle dropdowns neither. Every single reporter isn't a list, other than the list reporters, which you can already change.

Imagine

add [100] to (x position)

working for clones. WHY.

The only successful way I can find for this is changing the answer.

set answer to [Hello!]::sensing

But even that would need a new block.

Conclusion? I don't like this idea.

starlightsparker

The workaround involves using a bunch of if blocks which gets quite messy. Speaking from experience from a time I needed this feature.
So I think this would be useful to avoid a bunch of if nesting/stacking

ramenecho

AHypnoman wrote:
ramenecho wrote:
We definitely need this.
Please don't just state that you want or don't want a feature - explain why or add something else new to the discussion.

I’m just doing what half the other people on the first couple pages said, alll they said was “i support” so i was just doing the same.

DifferentDance8

helloagain_57 wrote:
Why? This doesn't have a use AT ALL. It wouldn't be useful for variable rectangle dropdowns, because imagine changing the X position with a variable change.
change (x position) by (0)//cursed
And list rectangle dropdowns neither. Every single reporter isn't a list, other than the list reporters, which you can already change.

Imagine
add [100] to (x position)
working for clones. WHY.

The only successful way I can find for this is changing the answer.
set answer to [Hello!]::sensing
But even that would need a new block.

Conclusion? I don't like this idea.

Well,

add [100] to (x position)

is just absurd, but

change (x position) by (0)

might actually be useful for newcomers who don't know that the

change x by (0)

block exists

for the life of Pico please add inline scratchblocks to the forums

nembence

DifferentDance8 wrote:
Well,
add [100] to (x position)
is just absurd, but
change (x position) by (0)
might actually be useful for newcomers who don't know that the
change x by (0)
block exists

for the life of Pico please add inline scratchblocks to the forums

I think if these blocks worked like in the suggestion then it wouldn't change the x position. It would work more like this:

if <(x position) = [10]> then {
{add [100] to (x position)} [=>] {add [100] to [10 v]}::ring #fff
{change (x position) by (1)} [=>] {change [10 v] by (1)}::ring #fff
[][][][][] [it's not] {change x by (1)} [so this could be confusing]::ring #fff
}::control

ramenecho

nembence wrote:
DifferentDance8 wrote:
Well,
add [100] to (x position)
is just absurd, but
change (x position) by (0)
might actually be useful for newcomers who don't know that the
change x by (0)
block exists

for the life of Pico please add inline scratchblocks to the forums
I think if these blocks worked like in the suggestion then it wouldn't change the x position. It would work more like this:
if <(x position) = [10]> then {
{add [100] to (x position)} [=>] {add [100] to [10 v]}::ring #fff
{change (x position) by (1)} [=>] {change [10 v] by (1)}::ring #fff
[][][][][] [it's not] {change x by (1)} [so this could be confusing]::ring #fff
}::control

Yeah, the alternative end up being something like this

if <(variable one) = [1]> then
add [thing] to [list 1v]
Else

if <(variable one) = [2]> then
add [thing] to [list 2v]
Else

if <(variable one) = [3]> then
add [thing] to [list 3v]
Else

if <(variable one) = [4]> then
add [thing] to [list 4v]
Else
// continue on for a VERY long time
End

End

End

End

When with this it could just be

add [thing] to (variable 1)

It could obviously be reworded to allow less confusion, but it would definitely help, a lot, in many situations. This would especially be prominent in custom blocks.

A reworded form would possibly be like this

add [thing] to list (variable 1)

Just thought i would add this to slightly clear up the confusion.

Iluvcosmetics325

When Topic Opened ::hat
bro this is not a bug or glitch ::operators

Iluvcosmetics325

xD i just realized im not in bugs/glitches sorry my mistake xD

oops ::hat ::operators
xD ::grey

Discuss Scratch