scratch really needs 2 dim lists. i think there should also be an >= (greater and equals to) and a <= (smaller and equals to) for the numbers section of the blocks.
Offline
I've just wrote in Suggestions > Scratch 1.5 forum my proposal to 'Custom Procedures' topic.
In Smalltalk the basic syntax of a message is : Object Message , isn`t that?
Well, Broadcasting is useful cause we can define simultaneous responders to a message.
But, if we could use a simply block like:
<Send to [Sprite . ] [message] >
we get a straight solution to the problem of customized functions and procedures.
Why? It´s very simple: we could assign to certain sprites (without needing special "block sprites" -or Morphs- ) the job to respond to messages making the procedures we teach them:
1. assign data to global variables (instead of returning objects).
2. i.e. go to another script and say something.
3. any another job we can write with the other blocks...
KISS principia: if we complicate so much like i`ve seen above, Scratch will become a Lego-like programmers stuff, not a kind tool for kids learning and creating.
We don´t need define special blocks, simply getting a Sprite assigned to do a job, we get the way to define custom functions more-like libraries in a more Smalltalk like clean and polite syntax.
Offline
There should be a create-a-block option under file. It would first let people set up how a block looks: colors, words, the shape, and input for numbers, words, or drop-down lists.. Then it would create a block that looks like that but doesn't do anything in the undercode of Scratch. Then they could use the undercode of Scratch to make it work, the way the Scratch Team makes blocks. These blocks could be used in projects. They could also individually be shared on the internet and on the blue tab at the top of the website there would be a new option: blocks. Blocks would be ranked like projects for top viewed and top downloaded and stuff. People would download them and put them in their Scratch. Scratch could be a customizable thing.
Offline
There isn't much point in functions really, although it would be a good idea. just create <set{ myarg }to( myval )> <broadcast[ myfunction ]and wait c> and somewhere else <when I receive[ myfunction ]>
<change x by( <{ myval }> )>
Offline
toontownmiser wrote:
As a parameter, something that would be remarkably helpful is a color output.
Yes, true. And I play tt too meet there?
Offline
where do you download i have xp.
Offline
what version of scratch was it? I want to download it!!!!!!!
Offline
Jakey22 wrote:
what version of scratch was it? I want to download it!!!!!!!
1.4. I have Scratch 1.4.
Offline
natalie wrote:
Here's what Kevin proposed:
kevin_karplus wrote:
For creating new blocks, there could be a "create-a-new-block" option on the sprite selector panel, and new blocks could be treated a lot like sprites.
Initially, I would recommend that new blocks be given a choice of only 2 flavors:
straight-through block
control block (which surrounds a chunk of code)
but later additions may make more choices available.
and be given a choice of 1 or 2 parameters, with the following types:
boolean (better call it true/false)
number
message
sprite-name
when the parameter types are chosen, then the parameters appear as blocks (or in the pulldown list for messages or sprites) . Perhaps they could all be colored pink, to represent their special status as parameters.
For loop blocks, a special block would be needed to represent the body of the loop.
A defined block would be allowed only one script, and a control block should use the special <body of code> block (possibly more than once).
One useful feature would be to be able to define variables "for this sprite only" in the defined blocks.
That sounds confusing
Offline
Mick wrote:
Hmm... Maybe you could make blocks in a thing called 'Block Maker' or something. There could be a programming place at the bottom & if what your writing in there means anything then there would be a screen at the top that makes an image of what the block would look like. Then you could save it in a folder then open the block in a section for blocks that have been made. & every time you start a new project that section is cleared & you have to import the block(s) again. & who cares if a block does something that another block already does. You could make all the blocks again except make them green, or bigger. & if you like a block then you could upload it onto the website. & if it does something that the Scratch Team find useful, the block could be added to the next version of Scratch! http://legoless.wordpress.com/wp-includ … rgreen.gif
I was EXACLTY thinking of that!
Offline
or you could change the sprites panel to library and put two tabs: one for sprites and one for functions or procedures or custom blocks or whatever you want to call it.
Offline
Hey guys, there is BYOB. I have it, but it could use the upgrades you have suggested.
Offline
another thing you could do is make a block that lets you make things stay away from each other
Offline
http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/DarkForce1998/881874
Her are my own blocks that i made!
Offline
a good block would be if i have recieved than do this
Offline
yipo wrote:
what about a block that makes the sprite duplicate itself ?
and also a "wait till i receive" block
those would be helpful
For the "Block that makes a sprite duplicate itself? Like, in Flash? That would be awesome! Especially in a game where if you pass a level it adds a new ball or something.
Offline