Scratch

chanmanpartyman · 2012-04-17 16:19:14

I do not support only because you have to think: This would take way too long. If you make a list in Squeak that contains all of those, your scripts would only be able to have like 30 blocks.

Greenatic · 2012-04-17 21:49:26

roijac wrote:
Greenatic wrote:
roijac wrote:
few quetions

is 'makes' also a word? flew? went?
Yes.
but you can't use them in scramble: you won't be able to use those words in scramble-like games. of course you could add a drop-down like 'include conjucations' but this will just increase the size of the dict (byte for each word -> about 1MB).
As far as I know, you can use those words in Scrabble.
do you think inappropriate words should also be available?
No. Why would that be useful?
ok. now take a dictionary and try to censor it. good luck
There are dictionary lists available online. I'm sure some are clean.
do you know that you can do that by yourself? why don't you just do it?
Using lists takes forever outside of turbo, and there is no way for a project to put itself into turbo mode. Therefore, using lists relies on the user to know when to turn on/off turbo mode.what you say is that you need it only because there's no turn on/off turbo?
Well, that's what makes it needed, since there is no effective workaround right now. It would still be useful, even with on/off turbo blocks.
why do you think we should download 5 MB more to be able to use scratch 2.0 (no, i don't mean in the flash player, i mean in the program itself, where you have to index it to be able to use it)
I'm not quite sure I understand this question. Could you clarify your question?
when you're making a project in scratch, it can't just download the dictionary if it needs to. that means each time you clear your cache you have to wait until scratch downloads 5 MB only because of one block.
How often do you clear your cache?

one positive point: i tested a dictionary with 1000000 items in python and it performed pretty well actually

chanmanpartyman wrote:
I do not support only because you have to think: This would take way too long. If you make a list in Squeak that contains all of those, your scripts would only be able to have like 30 blocks.

That's why I'm suggesting built-in functionality, so the Scratch frame rate doesn't slow it down and it can run at block-speed.

Last edited by Greenatic (2012-04-17 21:50:56)

PullJosh · 2012-04-18 18:55:56

Totally support!

Greenatic · 2012-04-18 19:43:40

PullJosh wrote:
Totally support!

Thanks! smile

shiguy101 · 2012-05-04 12:54:39

+1

Greenatic · 2012-05-04 16:09:42

shiguy101 wrote:
+1

Thanks! smile

gomore10 · 2012-05-16 17:33:13

I think that's a good idea. I support it!

Greenatic · 2012-05-16 18:37:30

gomore10 wrote:
I think that's a good idea. I support it!

Thanks! smile

Greenatic · 2012-05-20 21:26:54

bump

jontmy00 · 2012-05-22 05:28:41

I support. wink

KyleK7 · 2012-05-22 16:58:30

I support.

Greenatic · 2012-05-22 18:24:19

Thanks to jontmy00 and KyleK7! smile smile

Greenatic · 2012-05-28 16:33:54

bump

Greenatic · 2012-05-30 18:25:32

bump

ManaUser · 2012-05-30 21:28:47

So I did an experiment, using the 2of12 (largest) word list here. Loading and saving the resulting project became very slow. Though the file size is only about 500KB, and surprisingly the actual word search executed with almost no delay.

Anyway, I kind of like the idea of having this built in, but only is it could be implemented in such a way that the online player would only load the word list if actually needed, kind of like the Java player did for music.

Greenatic · 2012-05-31 17:54:38

ManaUser wrote:
Anyway, I kind of like the idea of having this built in, but only is it could be implemented in such a way that the online player would only load the word list if actually needed, kind of like the Java player did for music.

In above posts, I've emphasized that this would be best, to allow the functionality without appending the data to projects that don't need it.

Is that a support? smile

Jrocket97 · 2012-05-31 20:11:32

sounds like it could be useful. But, one thing I've seen in my fiddling with BYOB how Scratch can lag when dealing with large amounts of data. If you give it a lot to sift through, it lags out. With the entire English language... But support nonetheless, I'm sure the Scratch team could work out a way to fix that.

shpeters · 2012-05-31 20:15:34

I support this. Plus I want to be able to play things such as scrabble and hangman on my computer.

Greenatic · 2012-05-31 21:52:44

Thanks to the above two supporters! smile smile

Greenatic · 2012-06-03 16:59:09

bump

Greenatic · 2012-06-08 15:44:26

bump

Greenatic · 2012-06-12 15:08:58

bump

auntiechristine · 2012-06-13 09:10:37

This seems too unwieldy and impractical. The list of words would have to be enormous - there are well over 100,000 words in the English language, and then you've got different ways of spelling them in different countries. And that's just English - people from many countries use Scratch.

Aside from that though, the <[ ] is a [verb]?> part wouldn't work because deciding whether a word is a verb or not isn't that simple - it depends on the context and the rest of the sentence. There are tons of words which can be a verb or a noun depending how they're being used - record, email, film, protest, request, train, trade, drink, fish, promise, place, ring, etc, etc.

SciTecCf · 2012-06-13 09:15:34

Support. That would make my converter actually WORK.

I would also like <Does [] describe []?>

Greenatic · 2012-06-13 18:01:34

auntiechristine wrote:
This seems too unwieldy and impractical. The list of words would have to be enormous - there are well over 100,000 words in the English language, and then you've got different ways of spelling them in different countries. And that's just English - people from many countries use Scratch.

Aside from that though, the <[ ] is a [verb]?> part wouldn't work because deciding whether a word is a verb or not isn't that simple - it depends on the context and the rest of the sentence. There are tons of words which can be a verb or a noun depending how they're being used - record, email, film, protest, request, train, trade, drink, fish, promise, place, ring, etc, etc.

There are many more efficient ways of storing words than a simple list. Try googling them.

SciTecCf wrote:
Support. That would make my converter actually WORK.

I would also like <Does [] describe []?>

Thanks for the support. That last block might be impossible though--theoretically, any word can describe anything, especially in figurative language or poetry.

Scratch

archived forums

#101 2012-04-17 16:19:14

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#102 2012-04-17 21:49:26

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

roijac wrote:

Greenatic wrote:

roijac wrote:

chanmanpartyman wrote:

#103 2012-04-18 18:55:56

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#104 2012-04-18 19:43:40

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

PullJosh wrote:

#105 2012-05-04 12:54:39

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#106 2012-05-04 16:09:42

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

shiguy101 wrote:

#107 2012-05-16 17:33:13

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#108 2012-05-16 18:37:30

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

gomore10 wrote:

#109 2012-05-20 21:26:54

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#110 2012-05-22 05:28:41

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#111 2012-05-22 16:58:30

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#112 2012-05-22 18:24:19

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#113 2012-05-28 16:33:54

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#114 2012-05-30 18:25:32

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#115 2012-05-30 21:28:47

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#116 2012-05-31 17:54:38

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

ManaUser wrote:

#117 2012-05-31 20:11:32

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#118 2012-05-31 20:15:34

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#119 2012-05-31 21:52:44

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#120 2012-06-03 16:59:09

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#121 2012-06-08 15:44:26

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#122 2012-06-12 15:08:58

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#123 2012-06-13 09:10:37

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#124 2012-06-13 09:15:34

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

#125 2012-06-13 18:01:34

Re: <[ ] is a word?>, (random word), and <[ ] is a [verb v]?>

auntiechristine wrote:

SciTecCf wrote:

Board footer