Scratch

Pecola1 wrote:

Greenatic wrote:

Pecola1 wrote:

  I remember these in NetScratch!    They are some VERY cool blocks.

They were in NetScratch? ...Sorry if it looks like I copied, I promise I came up with this block and its code on my own.

No no no no no, I can tell you didn't copy it. I think NetScratch used the same type of thing as the time block, either that or an api, your block uses a different source, and more things to insert.    I like blocks like this.

Thanks.  I was thinking about making a translate one but Google is abolishing their free translation API on the December 1st.      I was also thinking about making a block using Google's stock API which they use for Google Finance--do you think that would be useful?

Last edited by Greenatic (2011-11-08 21:04:09)

AIOlover wrote:

Can I request a block?

Sure, go ahead!

YourLocalBlockLib wrote:

Shared by Pecola1

Blockspec:

('password for %s is %s ?' #b #username:password:)

Code:

username: t1 password: t2
    (HTTPSocket httpGet: 'contentshttp://scratch.mit.edu/api/authenticateuser?username=' , t1 , '&password=' , t2) contents = 'false' ifTrue: [^false].
^true

What this block does:
Reports whether the password for the username that is inserted is the right password. Useful for making a project which requires you have a Scratch account.

I'm not exactly sure that that would always be used for the better...........

Pecola1 wrote:

cocolover76 wrote:

YourLocalBlockLib wrote:

http://scratch.mit.edu/redirect/url?lin … 396941.gif Shared by Pecola1

Blockspec:

('password for %s is %s ?' #b #username:password:)

Code:

What this block does:
Reports whether the password for the username that is inserted is the right password. Useful for making a project which requires you have a Scratch account.

I'm not exactly sure that that would always be used for the better...........

>.> Why do we keep bringing this up?

XD

Well, what if someone makes a random text block?
Then they'd have to delete either the random text block, both blocks, or even get rid of the whole block library.

cocolover76 wrote:

Greenatic wrote:

but Google is abolishing their free translation API on the December 1st

Then download it before December 1st.

It's on the Internet.  The source code isn't free, using the API is.

cocolover76 wrote:

Pecola1 wrote:

cocolover76 wrote:

I'm not exactly sure that that would always be used for the better...........

>.> Why do we keep bringing this up?

XD

Well, what if someone makes a random text block?
Then they'd have to delete either the random text block, both blocks, or even get rid of the whole block library.

No then the step would be to take off the posting function.

How many times have I said that again?

Yes


Also we don't need the true and false booleans, I have the one with a text insert which can have true or false inserted into it.

The above post requires other librarians' opinions.

Sparks, I am unaware of the procedures for BYOB or Panther block updates (I don't even have BYOB; on a side note, could someone please give me a link?)  I saw two Panther requests and have fulfilled both of them.  Could you do a Panther update?

Blockspec: average color of pixels in square x:$Number$y:$Number$ to x:$Number$y:$Number$
Type: g
Category: Color blocks

^ Color r: (((self colorAtX: t1 y: t2) red + (self colorAtX: t3 y:t4) red) / 2) g: (((self colorAtX: t1 y: t2) green + (self colorAtX: t3 y:t4) green) / 2) b:  (((self colorAtX: t1 y: t2) blue + (self colorAtX: t3 y:t4) blue) / 2)

Blockspec: turn costume $Number$ into new sprite
Type: -
Category: Looks blocks

|t2 |
(t1 < 0) | (t1 ~= t1 rounded) | (t1 > (media select:[:t7| t7 isImage]) size) ifTrue:[^ self].
t2 _ self costumeNameFromNumber: t1.
((self costumesPage: 0) submorphs select:[:t5 |
t5 isKindOf: MediaItemMorph] ) do:[:t6 | t6 mediaName = t2
ifTrue:[
t2 _ self ownerThatIsA: ScratchFrameMorph.
    t2 ifNil: [^ self].
t2 addAndView:      (ScratchSpriteMorph new soleCostume: t6 media deepCopy).
    t6 deleteMedia]].

Greenatic wrote:

Pecola1 wrote:

Yes


Also we don't need the true and false booleans, I have the one with a text insert which can have true or false inserted into it.

I think we should deliberate with other librarians before removing the true/false blocks (even though I do agree).

EDIT:  The two megablocks are now one gigablock.   

Of course we should, thats why I posted.

DISCUSS

OK, now 3 out of 6 of the librarians support removal of the true/false blocks.  If one more librarian supports, we'll have a majority.

MathWizz wrote:

I wouldn't support. Why have something messy when it can be clean?

I don't think <[ ] = [ ]>, <[ ] > [ ]>, or <[ ] < [ ]> look messy at all.

sparks wrote:

Hmm... I'm still undecided... They're not needed but then it is a feature that most any scripting language supports as a constant. I use them a lot in Panther. Then again, if they weren't in Panther I would be perfectly content to just type True and False into the = operators. I'll vote that we do remove them...

Alright then, 66% of librarians support.  How many do you think are required to proceed with the deletion?

MathWizz wrote:

Scratch is supposed to be easy to use and understand. The <true> understood at a glance while <[0] = [0]> is not.

Actually, if I were a little kid, if 0 = 0 would make more sense than if true.   

MathWizz wrote:

I still think they should stay. Why pick on the more reasonable of the blocks instead of something like [if <> bounce] that could just as easily be replaced by the following?

Code:

[if <CONDITION>]
  [turn [180] degrees]
[end if]

I actually support the removal of all or most of the blocks listed in this post, which includes [if < > bounce].  I'm just starting with <true> and <false>, since they're the worst offenders.

And are you a librarian?  The page doesn't say so...

Last edited by Greenatic (2011-11-14 17:29:36)