I think SCRATCH should seriously have a go to back (Looks) block.
It has: Go to front
Go back ---- layers
But it doesn't have Go to back.
I know there's the easy workaround of go back 100000000000 layers
but come on- it's all a bit messy.
Dave1998
Offline
This isn't quite possible, as there is an infinite number of layers. Just do: Go back 9999
Last edited by ImagineIt (2012-10-11 18:13:02)
Offline
iTweak0r wrote:
what about [go forward () layers]? that would be cool too!
Just go backwards the negative.
Offline
ImagineIt wrote:
This isn't quite possible, as there is an infinite number of layers. Just do: Go back 9999
But even go back 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 still wouldn't get you to the very back
Last edited by Mokat (2012-10-11 19:45:09)
Offline
Mokat wrote:
ImagineIt wrote:
This isn't quite possible, as there is an infinite number of layers. Just do: Go back 9999
But even go back 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 still wouldn't get you to the very back
Even go back G64 wouldn't get you all the way back, although for practical purposes, 1000 or more will be enough.
Offline
Molybdenum wrote:
Mokat wrote:
ImagineIt wrote:
This isn't quite possible, as there is an infinite number of layers. Just do: Go back 9999
But even go back 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 still wouldn't get you to the very back
Even go back G64 wouldn't get you all the way back, although for practical purposes, 1000 or more will be enough.
Graham's # <3 (did I spell that right?)
Offline
zubblewu wrote:
Molybdenum wrote:
Mokat wrote:
But even go back 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 still wouldn't get you to the very backEven go back G64 wouldn't get you all the way back, although for practical purposes, 1000 or more will be enough.
Graham's # <3 (did I spell that right?)
Yep. TONS of Knuth up arrows. To be exact, G63 of them
Offline
Molybdenum wrote:
zubblewu wrote:
Molybdenum wrote:
Even go back G64 wouldn't get you all the way back, although for practical purposes, 1000 or more will be enough.Graham's # <3 (did I spell that right?)
Yep. TONS of Knuth up arrows. To be exact, G63 of them
Hey could you remind me of the first 15 digits?
Offline
ImagineIt wrote:
This isn't quite possible, as there is an infinite number of layers. Just do: Go back 9999
Well, technically to go to the back you have to go behind all the other sprites, so if you knew what layer the furthest back sprite was you could just go to that -1. Still no support due to easy workaround
Offline
zubblewu wrote:
Molybdenum wrote:
zubblewu wrote:
Graham's # <3 (did I spell that right?)Yep. TONS of Knuth up arrows. To be exact, G63 of them
Hey could you remind me of the first 15 digits?
No, but
The last ten digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387.
Offline
Oh come on, there can't be that many layers
just do this:
go back (10) layers
Offline
funelephant wrote:
Oh come on, there can't be that many layers :P
just do this:go back (10) layers
dont quote me on this but im pretty sure theres at least as many layers as there are sprites so 10 isnt enough :P
Offline
Mokat wrote:
You could have infinite layers if you had infinite sprites.
And is that feasable with any current method of computation?
Offline
funelephant wrote:
Oh come on, there can't be that many layers
just do this:go back (10) layers
but what if you wanted 10 sprites to go to the back, where it would be sprite 1 go to back, then sprite 2 go behind sprite 1, sprite 3 behind sprite 2, etc...
they would all be on the same layer.
If there's a layer# block there would be a way to go around the problem mentioned above.
Offline