go to x:() y:() in () secs while drawing a [] pokemon::motion

pvz_pro wrote:

no, what if someone suggested something like this:

go to x:() y:() in () secs while drawing a [] pokemon::motion

Cream_E_Cookie wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

No support. There is a huge difference between complex projects (ex griffpatch's projects) and a complex block/idea. To analyze why, let's compare an elementary-level novel and a really complicated word, such as discombobulate. (I'm sure at least half of the people reading this looked at the word and had no clue what it meant.) To an elementary student, both may seem complicated. The novel because it's got lots of words, but because it is an elementary-level novel, all of the words are going to be simple words that are easy to understand. This is just like a complex project on Scratch; it has a lot of blocks, but the blocks are easy to understand because they're worded in ways that are easy to understand and represent basic/necessary functions in programming. A big word, like discombobulate, would seem complicated because… well, it's a big, complicated word. Few, if any at all, elementary students would know what discombobulate means. Even after reading the definition, the word might still seem complicated. This is comparable to a complicated block, such as a split block or elseif/elif block. A new scratcher would not know what it does due to the block's complexity and, unlike a project, the scratcher cannot read the code to figure out what it does. Even after looking at the definition, it would still be hard to understand.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

DaSpudLord wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

I see where you're going with this - just because something *can* be confusing to those new to programming, it doesn't mean it isn't a legitimate suggestion, because we already have a lot of things that those newer to programming wouldn't understand.

I know, for one, that when I was new to Scratch, I had no idea what lists were, what the different string functions did, or what any of the fancy math things (including absolute value) did. Despite the fact that these functions aren't all that easy to understand, we have them because otherwise things would be very difficult.

And I agree that a suggestion shouldn't necessarily be rejected because it is complicated. However, some should; 3D, for example, is rejected because of how complicated it is.

Suggestions should be judged on an individual basis; if a suggestion is a little complicated but has a lot of merit (such as reporter custom blocks) than saying it is complicated isn't really a good enough reason to not support it. But some suggestions that are complicated and don't have too much use should be considered more carefully, because Scratch is an entry-level programming language.

This is a really nice summary of our design philosophy for Scratch! You can see more about it over here. So, yes, people should not reject a suggestion just because it can be “too confusing for beginners” but because it doesn't bring enough new functionality to justify the added complexity. Everything is a balancing act

I completely agree.

dinogirl112 wrote:

No support. This could be confusing to New Scratchers.
JK, support.

play sound [lol v] from (3).(7)(2)until done::sound

point away from [sprite v]::motion

when stop sign clicked::events

I wrote:

Wow. I supported a long time ago. I don't support that much. I'll semi-support. I think that this should be discouraged if there is no reason for being confuzzling. Also, too vague is a fine reason to not support (temporarily)

LionHeart70 wrote:

No support. Disagreeing with a topic isn't rude unless it's meant to offend someone directly or deliberately. And the topic being too confusing to some people is actually a valid reason.

Sigton wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

No support. Disagreeing with a topic isn't rude unless it's meant to offend someone directly or deliberately. And the topic being too confusing to some people is actually a valid reason.

You haven't actually addressed any of the points made in this topic other than stating the inverse of it's general argument.

Sigton

LionHeart70 wrote:

..Then I suppose I don't understand the main points of the topic?

Sigton wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

..Then I suppose I don't understand the main points of the topic?

That is possible, yes

Sigton

FancyFoxy wrote:

I support! When I first joined Scratch, I was really confused why there were reporter blocks and boolean blocks. I didn't know how they went into a project, and was confused as to why they even exist if they don't snap to the bottom of another block. But reporters and booleans are extremely important to even a basic game. We shouldn't shoot down really good and important ideas just for the sake of a Scratcher not understanding.

pen up

pen down

(() mod ())

play drum ( v) for (0.25) beats