One thing.
In either one, have it scan for an equation like this:
(11*2)(2*3)
and have it put a * in between.
Offline
Oh, yes.
Offline
scimonster wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
scimonster wrote:
You know what we forgot in the setup engine? × and ÷
![]()
Who uses those? The standard ones are actually * and /.
How are we gonna do factorials. I made a factorial block (in the block library), but that won't work here.But they get used anyways.
![]()
I do not know. I suppose with a repeat method...Code:
set [count] to [0] set [factorial] to [0] repeat (number) change [count] by (1) set [factorial] to ((factorial) * (count))
Well, we COULD make our own block for it, but then you'd have to install the block to use Xenon...
Offline
Necromaster wrote:
scimonster wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
Who uses those? The standard ones are actually * and /.
How are we gonna do factorials. I made a factorial block (in the block library), but that won't work here.But they get used anyways.
![]()
I do not know. I suppose with a repeat method...Code:
set [count] to [0] set [factorial] to [0] repeat (number) change [count] by (1) set [factorial] to ((factorial) * (count))Well, we COULD make our own block for it, but then you'd have to install the block to use Xenon...
![]()
Or use my method.
Offline
scimonster wrote:
Necromaster wrote:
scimonster wrote:
But they get used anyways.![]()
I do not know. I suppose with a repeat method...Code:
set [count] to [0] set [factorial] to [0] repeat (number) change [count] by (1) set [factorial] to ((factorial) * (count))Well, we COULD make our own block for it, but then you'd have to install the block to use Xenon...
![]()
Or use my method.
![]()
*Sigh* Ok.
Offline
Necromaster wrote:
scimonster wrote:
Necromaster wrote:
Well, we COULD make our own block for it, but then you'd have to install the block to use Xenon...![]()
Or use my method.
![]()
*Sigh* Ok.
![]()
After all, it is the best.
Offline
Is this possible in Scratch? Maybe Panther...
Offline
We're working on it.
Offline
Could I help?
Offline
scimonster wrote:
Necromaster wrote:
scimonster wrote:
Or use my method.![]()
*Sigh* Ok.
![]()
After all, it is the best.
![]()
Yes yes... Bow down to the almighty Scimonster.
(Gosh, I just love the
face)
Offline
Umm, repeat will be slow. Any better ideas?
Offline
I'm advertising, just not a big banner! My sig says
Are we working?
Offline
scimonster wrote:
I'm advertising, just not a big banner! My sig says
Are we working?
Oh, I didn't notice that
I'll add you to the list.
PS Working on what
PSS Is it just me or have people started getting addicted to the
smiley?
Offline
Working on Xenon.
Offline
scimonster wrote:
![]()
Working on Xenon.![]()
Yeah, isn't that obvious? It wouldn't be in my signature if it wasn't being worked on...
Last edited by Hardmath123 (2011-04-06 05:32:14)
Offline
Yeah...
So who's doing what now?
NONEDIT: 1500th post!!!
Offline
Checkpoint
Here's what we've accomplished:
•How to do exponents
•A reasonable method for bracket opening
Here's what we need to accomplish before next checkpoint:
•Finish a list-based setup engine
•Factorials
Last edited by Hardmath123 (2011-04-07 04:31:44)
Offline
I gave you a factorial engine.
Offline
Do you know how I can contact applejack?
Offline
I meant without repeats. Repeats lag. Maybe (if we're not stuck on 1s1s) in the background a program could go on calculating the factorials, and adding them to a list.
forever
set n to 1
set factorial to 1
forever
set factorial to n*factorial
add factorial to (list)
change n by 1
Here, item (x) of (list) = (x)!
Offline
jji7skyline wrote:
Do you know how I can contact applejack?
On his projects, on this site, and here (along with this thread, of course).
Offline
I'd like 0s1s. The whole calculation will take time, and I don't see another way to do it.
Reason for 0s1s: to start my streak of 0s1s and 1s1s projects (I'm working on one now.)
Last edited by scimonster (2011-04-07 06:36:35)
Offline
Ok, I suppose that's that then...
Offline