The Round Block Should Be Well-Rounded.

Scratchifier

So, here is what the round block is like currently:

(round ())

Here's what I think it should look like:

(round () to the [tenths place  v] ::operators)

So, what do you think? The options would be thousanths, hundreths, tenths, ones, tens, hundreds, and thousands. Also, possibly “to the ()th digit”, however only if somebody can think of a use for that… xD

There is also another idea, by Cyoce:

() rounded to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter
() floored to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter
() ceilinged to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter

Which one do you like more?

Thoughts?

-Scratchifier

Last edited by Scratchifier (Dec. 27, 2014 17:25:01)

PrincessPanda_test_

Support!

Correct block:

(round () to the [tenths place v] :: operators)

Last edited by PrincessPanda_test_ (Dec. 26, 2014 00:39:42)

Scratchifier

PrincessPanda_test_ wrote:
Support!

Correct block:
(round () to the [tenths place v]) :: operators

That doesn't look quite right…

Edit: Thanks, I fixed it.

Last edited by Scratchifier (Dec. 26, 2014 00:23:38)

Superdoggy

No support.

((round ((Variable) * (10))) / (10)) //Round to tenths place

((round ((Variable) / (10))) * (10)) //Round to tens place

Last edited by Superdoggy (Dec. 26, 2014 01:46:30)

Scratchifier

Superdoggy wrote:

No support.

((round ((Variable) * (10))) / (10)) //Round to tenths place

((round ((Variable) / (10))) * (10)) //Round to tens place

*Makes a heavy reference to Cyoce's signature*

GCGCGC

Scratchifier wrote:
Superdoggy wrote:
No support.
((round ((Variable) * (10))) / (10)) //Round to tenths place
((round ((Variable) / (10))) * (10)) //Round to tens place
*Makes a heavy reference to Cyoce's signature*

Cyoce only refers to “workarounds” that involve loads of complicated square rooting/logarithms etc or are really complicated/annoying to use.
Never thought of that particular workaround (never had to use something like it), but it's simple to understand (only basic math) and only uses 4 blocks. Sounds okay to me.

Sorry, no support

-Few uses
-Very easy workaround

Scratchifier

GCGCGC wrote:
Scratchifier wrote:
Superdoggy wrote:
No support.
((round ((Variable) * (10))) / (10)) //Round to tenths place
((round ((Variable) / (10))) * (10)) //Round to tens place
*Makes a heavy reference to Cyoce's signature*
Cyoce only refers to “workarounds” that involve loads of complicated square rooting/logarithms etc or are really complicated/annoying to use.
Never thought of that particular workaround (never had to use something like it), but it's simple to understand (only basic math) and only uses 4 blocks. Sounds okay to me.

Sorry, no support
-Few uses
-Very easy workaround

The point of this thread is not make a new block to get a new function, but to improve and replace the block that is currently out there.

All current round blocks would just be replaced with “Round (x) to ones place”. It wouldn't harm anything, and it would improve ease of use for more advanced users as well as clearing things up for beginners.

Last edited by Scratchifier (Dec. 26, 2014 03:21:17)

GCGCGC

Scratchifier wrote:
The point of this thread is not make a new block to get a new function, but to improve and replace the block that is currently out there.

All current round blocks would just be replaced with “Round (x) to ones place”. It wouldn't harm anything, and it would improve ease of use for more advanced users as well as clearing things up for beginners.

Honestly I don't see how making a block longer/more specific would help…
Though the problem is that the Scratch team'll only add very useful suggestions, not anything “that won't hurt”, otherwise it would be very cluttered and change too much for our comfort

Scratchifier

GCGCGC wrote:
Scratchifier wrote:
The point of this thread is not make a new block to get a new function, but to improve and replace the block that is currently out there.

All current round blocks would just be replaced with “Round (x) to ones place”. It wouldn't harm anything, and it would improve ease of use for more advanced users as well as clearing things up for beginners.
Honestly I don't see how making a block longer/more specific would help…
Though the problem is that the Scratch team will only add very useful suggestions, not anything “that won't hurt”, otherwise it would be very cluttered and change too much for our comfort

How would this change too much for comfort? I personally think that it would be more useful than just “Round ()”.

GCGCGC

Let's say everyone decided to make a proposal to change some blocks…
If the Scratch team accepted all of them, blocks might change every few days…not everyone would like that.
Of course, they won't though.
Few people would find this block change useful, and it can be recreated with 3 extra blocks…

Scratchifier

GCGCGC wrote:
Let's say everyone decided to make a proposal to change some blocks…
If the Scratch team accepted all of them, blocks might change every few days…not everyone would like that.
Of course, they won't though.
Few people would find this block change useful, and it can be recreated with 3 extra blocks…

Uhh, this is a block improvement, and most blocks do not have opportunities like this to be improved.

chooper100

support :: grey

We can also use this for significant figures.

1234abcdcba4321

No support for reasons above.
The workaround is also a lot more flexible than the block you suggested.

Centrifugal

Support

Scratchifier

1234abcdcba4321 wrote:
No support for reasons above.
The workaround is also a lot more flexible than the block you suggested.

Okay, how so? Perhaps it could also have another option, custom, and when you click it, you can specify the digit before the decimal point and after the decimal point that you want it to round to…

RPFluffy

Support!

ChocolatePi

Scratch is not a place to have stuff done for you. Pretty soon, people are gonna be suggesting stuff like

when green flag pressed
play tic-tac-toe game
quit

you should do stuff yourself, and if you're too lazy or not smart enough, you don't need it.

Scratchifier

ChocolatePi wrote:
Scratch is not a place to have stuff done for you. Pretty soon, people are gonna be suggesting stuff like

when green flag pressed
play tic-tac-toe game
quit

you should do stuff yourself, and if you're too lazy or not smart enough, you don't need it.

…

Cyoce

Having a dropdown would make it cumbersome. Make it like this

() rounded to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter
() floored to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter
() ceilinged to the nearest (1 v) :: operators reporter

Last edited by Cyoce (Dec. 27, 2014 04:04:31)

horsegurl16

stop
think [Why would you NOT support this?]
say [Support!]

Discuss Scratch