Case Sensitive Equals Block

NutOfCoco

Support

NutOfCoco

Support.

AndPherbCodes

It would confuse a lot of little kids who go “A is the same as a”

AndPherbCodes

kaizerlila wrote:
AndPherbCodes wrote:
It would confuse a lot of little kids who go “A is the same as a”
yeah, but it will be better to use an equals block
<[] = []>

What are you trying to say?

Hypersaurus

change it to a new block please this would break projects right now

haru_animanga

I support but we know that already have a solutions

Hypersaurus

this would break projects no support

Hypersaurus

Malicondi wrote:
(#84)
bump, I don't know why this isn't already a thing as since the blocks run using JS, and JS is case sensitive with “==”, I don't understand why this doesn't already work.

because now it would break projects

CatPlusHouse

NO support for updating the block support for a entirely new block
If we update the block projects WILL break
If we make a new block like

([abc] == [Abc] :: operators) // False
([AbC] == [AbC] :: operators) // True

Last edited by CatPlusHouse (Aug. 5, 2026 17:49:25)

bitmap_caketin

Would it also need to be the same data format?

<(() + (1)) = (join [] [1]) exactly?::operators>

r3hehehehehhe

dump because bupe

BW_CA_26

I support this, this would make creating things such as a text encoder/decoder much easier.

Hypersaurus

guys you know thios would break most projects right?

supercroissants

Hypersaurus wrote:
guys you know thios would break most projects right?

you know that this would most likely be a block right?

Superplayer18

Support

This is really needed :: #005599

CSwitch

I support this!

Hypersaurus wrote:
guys you know thios would break most projects right?

Hypersaurus wrote:
Malicondi wrote:
(#84)
bump, I don't know why this isn't already a thing as since the blocks run using JS, and JS is case sensitive with “==”, I don't understand why this doesn't already work.
because now it would break projects

The suggestion is asking that a new block be added, so it won't break current projects. For example:

<[Aa] == [AA] ::operators> //false
<[aa] == [AA] ::operators> //false
<[AA] == [AA] ::operators> //true

Last edited by CSwitch (Oct. 4, 2026 23:40:16)

Hypersaurus

CSwitch wrote:
I support this!
Hypersaurus wrote:
guys you know thios would break most projects right?
Hypersaurus wrote:
Malicondi wrote:
(#84)
bump, I don't know why this isn't already a thing as since the blocks run using JS, and JS is case sensitive with “==”, I don't understand why this doesn't already work.
because now it would break projects
The suggestion is asking that a new block be added, so it won't break current projects. For example:
<[Aa] == [AA] ::operators> //false
<[aa] == [AA] ::operators> //false
<[AA] == [AA] ::operators> //true

no it's just asking for the block to be updated

Hypersaurus

OP needs to add the fact it would be a diffrent block as updating the current one breaks projects

NutOfCoco

Hypersaurus wrote:
CSwitch wrote:
-snip-
no it's just asking for the block to be updated

The op didn't definitively say that it was to update the current block, and in fact the title kind of says the opposite.

MonkeeHead21

when green flag clicked
forever
support

Oh, yes. Support.

Discuss Scratch