This is something I've seen in a lot of automation programs that use if/if else conditions. The only way I know how to describe it is with examples;

So lets say you're working on a project and you have a very long script filled with if/else conditions, like below;

forever
if <true> then
do stuff   
end
if <true> then
do other stuff  
end
if <true> then
do stuff   
end
if <true> then
do more stuff  
end
if <true> then
do stuff   
end
end

Now lets say that you don't want the middle blocks to be checked if the first or second one renders true. Instead, you'd rather have the last block checked if the first or second is true. This is where labels and go to's come in;

forever
if <true> then
do stuff
end
if <true> then
do other stuff
go to [ Skipper] 
end
if <true> then
do some stuff
if <true> then
do more stuff
end
Label: Skipper 
if <true> then
do stuff
end
end

Users would create as many labels as needed, such as variables, and a “go to” block would contain a pull down list of all the labels they have created. These blocks would probably have a different color scheme, such as grey for the go to block, and beige for the labels, just to add clarity to the scripts.

This method of labeling and assigning go-to blocks could also be used as a form of looping!;

when green flag clicked
Label: Start loop
if <true> then
go to [ End loop]
else
go to [ Start loop]
end
Label: End loop
Continue with the rest of the script

This would be a great feature because I hate it when you want to make a loop with if-Blocks but you must duplicate the hole code.
Thoughts?

Not thinking 100% clearly at the moment, but I think this might be able to done with variables (can’t really come up with how to describe it)

I believe this is workaroundable using the broadcast blocks.

Also, I heard that using “go to” commands is considered bad practice because it makes the code harder to follow.

Additionally, I found this duplicate, which strangely has the same content as the OP.

go to x: () y: ()

go to [Sprite v]

I believe these already exist.

mica43683 wrote:

go to x: () y: ()

go to [Sprite v]

I believe these already exist.

mica43683 wrote:

go to x: () y: ()

go to [Sprite v]

I believe these already exist.

I believe you misinterpreted the suggestion.

Sheep_maker wrote:

I believe this is workaroundable using the broadcast blocks.

Also, I heard that using “go to” commands is considered bad practice because it makes the code harder to follow.

Additionally, I found this duplicate, which strangely has the same content as the OP.

I think like it's copied
I dont remember any language that has this thing.
There are problems with blocks:
1) In which category? : control
2)So it will have 2 blocks i)

 go to [yay v]::control 

ii)

 lablel : [yay v]::control 

So it will do nothing if one label block is missing ?
3) Why do you need it? I never saw this type of problem.I know if I saw it somewhere I have used broadcasts or vars for that.It will make it like flow chart's connector!
4) Kids cant understand this easily.

No support

Sheep_maker wrote:

I believe this is workaroundable using the broadcast blocks.

Also, I heard that using “go to” commands is considered bad practice because it makes the code harder to follow.

Additionally, I found this duplicate, which strangely has the same content as the OP.

I' ve copied this because there was no usable answer.

LW_Studios wrote:

Sheep_maker wrote:

I believe this is workaroundable using the broadcast blocks.

Also, I heard that using “go to” commands is considered bad practice because it makes the code harder to follow.

Additionally, I found this duplicate, which strangely has the same content as the OP.

I' ve copied this because there was no usable answer.

Why not post on the other topic? Necroposting isn't a thing on the suggestions forums, given that the suggestion hasn't been implemented yet and the post is constructive.

Shouldn't this topic be closed. And no support for reasons above.