Discuss Scratch
- Discussion Forums
- » Suggestions
- » Custom c blocks and hat blocks
- airplanedodge
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
- scratchieguy12345678
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
- Scratchperson1000000
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Hey! Don't say that to my workaround!Are you saying that we shouldn't make I get custom hat blocks a little bit, but what's the point of custom C blocks? Why would you ever need to use anything other than
-snippity snip snip-
?
There's a lot of workarounds that you can use for the custom c blocks you want to make.
No support.
-bad workaround snip-
?
There's a better workaround:set [i v] to [1]
repeat (10)
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
DJHNVLKJUDHFIUYHDLKUHDKLFJUYGDKJFGDHMFGMDBKJSDBCKSNICUNDCHICUGUYDSGFUHGADJFIEUGAFKJ
- scratchieguy12345678
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Hey! Don't say that to my workaround!Are you saying that we shouldn't make I get custom hat blocks a little bit, but what's the point of custom C blocks? Why would you ever need to use anything other than
-snippity snip snip-
?
There's a lot of workarounds that you can use for the custom c blocks you want to make.
No support.
-bad workaround snip-
?
There's a better workaround:set [i v] to [1]
repeat (10)
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
By bad, I meant overly inefficient and clunky.
- airplanedodge
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
- scratchieguy12345678
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
Yeah, but this isn't that hard to do.
- gdpr5b78aa4361827f5c2a08d700
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Neither is normal custom blocks. Just copy and paste the script. The thing is, doing it with normal custom blocks, and doing it with c/hat blocks would both be impractical.Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
Yeah, but this isn't that hard to do.
- scratchieguy12345678
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Neither is normal custom blocks. Just copy and paste the script. The thing is, doing it with normal custom blocks, and doing it with c/hat blocks would both be impractical.Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
Yeah, but this isn't that hard to do.
Well, I guess. But there's still no need for custom hat blocks. Just use an if loop.
- gdpr5b78aa4361827f5c2a08d700
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Custom hat blocks would be more efficient, since with an if loop you have to check every frame, but hat blocks only get called when the event actually happens.Neither is normal custom blocks. Just copy and paste the script. The thing is, doing it with normal custom blocks, and doing it with c/hat blocks would both be impractical.Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
Yeah, but this isn't that hard to do.
Well, I guess. But there's still no need for custom hat blocks. Just use an if loop.
- scratchieguy12345678
- Scratcher
500+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Custom hat blocks would be more efficient, since with an if loop you have to check every frame, but hat blocks only get called when the event actually happens.Neither is normal custom blocks. Just copy and paste the script. The thing is, doing it with normal custom blocks, and doing it with c/hat blocks would both be impractical.Yeah, let's remove normal custom blocks because they have workarounds.Hi, please read the topic title, it's custom c blocks and hat blocks not workaround for custom c blocksI guess You DIDNT EVEN READ THE NAME OF THE BLOCK There's a better workaround:
for () = () to ()
not for each () in ()set [i v] to [1]
repeat until <(i) = [10]>
...
change [i v] by (1)
end
There's workarounds for custom c blocks. That's why I'm not supporting the suggestion. I'm still on topic.
Yeah, but this isn't that hard to do.
Well, I guess. But there's still no need for custom hat blocks. Just use an if loop.
That is true. Then I actually support this.
- brooc210
- Scratcher
100+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Last edited by brooc210 (May 11, 2021 15:13:55)
- gdpr5b78aa4361827f5c2a08d700
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Dupicate.Not even close…
- Unithlees3
- Scratcher
1000+ posts
Custom c blocks and hat blocks
Support! It would be useful to repeat at certain times (not like the repeat () block) and by modifying conditions, here is an example:
define while <blean> :: cstart
repeat until <not <blean>>
start script :: custom-arg
end
this is a signature, it goes beneath my posts and a link here isn't considered advertising
meh youtube channel is here
- Discussion Forums
- » Suggestions
- » Custom c blocks and hat blocks