Scratch

bullelk12 · 2013-01-20 18:58:30

I think it would be cool to be able to make a scratch project and then view the actual, written code. After seeing how it works a few times then we may actually be able to type the code rather than drag and drop it. I think it would be a great way to learn how more complicated programming languages function.

ImagineIt · 2013-01-20 19:07:59

That would actually be a pretty good way for me to learn flash!

CN12 · 2013-01-20 20:25:20

It would be cool...

jvvg · 2013-01-20 22:08:40

The whole point of Scratch is that it's easy. All of it is easy to figure out. No block or component can't be figured out by a beginner.
Making the code typeable would defeat the purpose, and if you want to see the Flash code, it uses a player that is simply a parser for the Scratch File Format.

bullelk12 · 2013-01-20 23:11:08

jvvg wrote:
The whole point of Scratch is that it's easy. All of it is easy to figure out. No block or component can't be figured out by a beginner.
Making the code typeable would defeat the purpose, and if you want to see the Flash code, it uses a player that is simply a parser for the Scratch File Format.

Whoa whoa, that's like limiting what people can do on purpose. Someone could completely ignore that aspect of scratch and wouldn't be hindered a bit. But for those who do care, they would be able to as a learning experience.

bullelk12 · 2013-01-21 10:35:21

Who agrees cause I really want this.

mythbusteranimator · 2013-01-21 12:01:31

That would be epic, but VERY hard

And then it would lead to a whole new upbringing of Flash games on the internet tongue

bullelk12 · 2013-01-21 15:30:25

well, maybe not, I mean the computer translates a scratch project into flash, there must be a way to see that flash code if the computer turns it into flash. The code has to exist somewhere. I may somehow be wrong I guess.

mythbusteranimator · 2013-01-21 15:54:07

bullelk12 wrote:
well, maybe not, I mean the computer translates a scratch project into flash, there must be a way to see that flash code if the computer turns it into flash. The code has to exist somewhere. I may somehow be wrong I guess.

true. hmm

Rub0Gameton · 2013-01-21 16:08:21

Might as well just use Flash. But that is just my opinion. What would be the point of it if you can just drag and drop it? Drag 'n Dropping is faster and easier.

jvvg · 2013-01-21 16:49:14

bullelk12 wrote:
jvvg wrote:
The whole point of Scratch is that it's easy. All of it is easy to figure out. No block or component can't be figured out by a beginner.
Making the code typeable would defeat the purpose, and if you want to see the Flash code, it uses a player that is simply a parser for the Scratch File Format.
Whoa whoa, that's like limiting what people can do on purpose. Someone could completely ignore that aspect of scratch and wouldn't be hindered a bit. But for those who do care, they would be able to as a learning experience.

If you really want Scratch to have no limits, then it would have to be able to read/write files, access network ports directly, random-access RAM, use DLL files, be able to integrate directly with OS APIs, etc.
A text-based language provides no additional value to Scratch, and only makes it more difficult for younger people to understand.
If you really want to learn a text-based language, use Python or something. Don't bother with Scratch.

OverPowered · 2013-01-21 23:33:01

I would definitely support an option to code Scratch via text instead of blocks, for a multitude of reasons.

1. Huge scripts
Sometimes, projects, especially 1s1s, can grow a script so long that it crashes Scratch or makes edits impossible. When one sees projects such as coolstuff's Path Finder, it quickly becomes apparent that block-based scripts can sometimes be unwieldy. Text avoids this, and would help slower computers greatly.

2. Transport of Scripts
Scratch scripts can never be posted directly onto the forums, comments, or anywhere, but must be typed out with the forum equivalent of Scratch code or go through an image hosting site. If a text-to-code mode existed, it would be a matter of cutting and pasting between pojects or onto the website.

3. Education
Unfortunate as it may seem, not all programming is done with colorful blocks. Scratchers must learn this, and begin to move towards lines of text if they ever want to advance to more powerful coding.

Additionally, I see no way how this could make Scratch harder to understand. If a user cannot figure out the text type of coding, they can simply use the block-based coding until they understand its workings. Users aren't exactly being forced to use the feature, correct?

bullelk12 · 2013-01-21 23:41:20

Finally someone who get it. Adding more doesn't have to equal harder, anyone who didn't want to wouldn't have to. It's their decision, and if some of you are worried about being bested because you don't want to take the time to learn the real deal, I'm sorry. But I really want this!

bullelk12 · 2013-01-21 23:44:19

As for scratch having no limits, that's beyond what I was asking for. All I want is to be able to see and write the flash with the scratch software, that's all. As I and OverPowered said, you're not forced to do it this way hmm

OverPowered · 2013-01-22 16:36:24

Still a good idea. ^_^

iTweak0r · 2013-01-22 17:52:12

OverPowered wrote:
I
Scratch scripts can never be posted directly onto the forums

Use the ScratchBlocks tag!

when gf clicked
repeat until <(timer) > [10]>
  go to [mouse-pointer v]
end
think [Scripts in your posts!] for (3) secs

OverPowered · 2013-01-22 18:09:17

iTweak0r wrote:
OverPowered wrote:
Scratch scripts can never be posted directly onto the forums
Use the ScratchBlocks tag!
when gf clicked
repeat until <(timer) > [10]>
  go to [mouse-pointer v]
end
think [Scripts in your posts!] for (3) secs

I know. tongue What I'm attempting to say is that, if a text-to-code editor existed, you wouldn't have to retype everything into the [/scratchblocks] format, but could copy and paste the actual code. smile

Firedrake969 · 2013-01-22 18:12:02

Rub0Gameton wrote:
Might as well just use Flash. But that is just my opinion. What would be the point of it if you can just drag and drop it? Drag 'n Dropping is faster and easier.

Typing is a lot faster and easier.

veggieman001 · 2013-01-22 19:00:38

jvvg wrote:
bullelk12 wrote:
jvvg wrote:
The whole point of Scratch is that it's easy. All of it is easy to figure out. No block or component can't be figured out by a beginner.
Making the code typeable would defeat the purpose, and if you want to see the Flash code, it uses a player that is simply a parser for the Scratch File Format.
Whoa whoa, that's like limiting what people can do on purpose. Someone could completely ignore that aspect of scratch and wouldn't be hindered a bit. But for those who do care, they would be able to as a learning experience.
If you really want Scratch to have no limits, then it would have to be able to read/write files, access network ports directly, random-access RAM, use DLL files, be able to integrate directly with OS APIs, etc.
A text-based language provides no additional value to Scratch, and only makes it more difficult for younger people to understand.
If you really want to learn a text-based language, use Python or something. Don't bother with Scratch.

Well, I think Scratch is good for learning the basic concepts, &c., but if you want to do text-based code, then yeah do something else after that.

bullelk12 · 2013-01-22 19:59:47

which is why having this in scratch would promote both worlds.

jvvg · 2013-01-22 20:07:05

bullelk12 wrote:
which is why having this in scratch would promote both worlds.

If you really want the best of everything, then your computer would have a partition for every operating system ever written, have every program ever written on it, etc.
My point is that you don't always need the "best of both worlds". The point of Scratch is to be easy to understand and teach programming to kids. A text based language has nothing to do with that purpose.

mythbusteranimator · 2013-01-22 20:51:06

If, according to the original post, it can simply display the flash code, wouldn't that make publishing flash games/animations five times easier?

OverPowered · 2013-01-22 22:54:55

As far as I can see, allowing users to see the code behind the blocks won't make Scratch any more difficul to understand. Again, users are not forced to use text, and instead can choose to use whichever option that suits them more.

bullelk12 · 2013-01-23 00:29:37

I know there must be a reason behind your answers jvvg, but the fact is that by using this idea you could still teach very young kids to code in text and still maintain the policy.

The text programming is the next level of course but it's not all out programming necessarily. Because it's still based off the original scratch blocks, so you could place the blocks and just look at the code as the next very easy step forward without any extra difficulty. Then, once you've gotten the general pattern in your head you could take the next step. Which is trying to type it.

I believe this would still stick with the policy of getting kids to learn to program easily by taking small steps.

bullelk12 · 2013-01-23 00:32:38

I mean, Imagine this. You place a "move (10) steps" block, you could take a look at what that looks like in text. Then you could an "if" block around the first block and see what that looks like and so on. Those are super small steps that wouldn't even be required.

Scratch

archived forums

#1 2013-01-20 18:58:30

Real Code Generator

#2 2013-01-20 19:07:59

Re: Real Code Generator

#3 2013-01-20 20:25:20

Re: Real Code Generator

#4 2013-01-20 22:08:40

Re: Real Code Generator

#5 2013-01-20 23:11:08

Re: Real Code Generator

jvvg wrote:

#6 2013-01-21 10:35:21

Re: Real Code Generator

#7 2013-01-21 12:01:31

Re: Real Code Generator

#8 2013-01-21 15:30:25

Re: Real Code Generator

#9 2013-01-21 15:54:07

Re: Real Code Generator

bullelk12 wrote:

#10 2013-01-21 16:08:21

Re: Real Code Generator

#11 2013-01-21 16:49:14

Re: Real Code Generator

bullelk12 wrote:

jvvg wrote:

#12 2013-01-21 23:33:01

Re: Real Code Generator

#13 2013-01-21 23:41:20

Re: Real Code Generator

#14 2013-01-21 23:44:19

Re: Real Code Generator

#15 2013-01-22 16:36:24

Re: Real Code Generator

#16 2013-01-22 17:52:12

Re: Real Code Generator

OverPowered wrote:

#17 2013-01-22 18:09:17

Re: Real Code Generator

iTweak0r wrote:

OverPowered wrote:

#18 2013-01-22 18:12:02

Re: Real Code Generator

Rub0Gameton wrote:

#19 2013-01-22 19:00:38

Re: Real Code Generator

jvvg wrote:

bullelk12 wrote:

jvvg wrote:

#20 2013-01-22 19:59:47

Re: Real Code Generator

#21 2013-01-22 20:07:05

Re: Real Code Generator

bullelk12 wrote:

#22 2013-01-22 20:51:06

Re: Real Code Generator

#23 2013-01-22 22:54:55

Re: Real Code Generator

#24 2013-01-23 00:29:37

Re: Real Code Generator

#25 2013-01-23 00:32:38

Re: Real Code Generator

Board footer