Scratch

Ah, that will work for the "old" Scratch projects. But Scratch 2.0 has a completely different file format which is not compatible with BYOB 3.1 or Scratch 1.4.

Jens wrote:

The online version could offer more powerful features, like batch-conversion of a user's whole project stash.

I love it: Snapin8r Pro, only $8.95 in the app store.   

I've been working on a new scratchblocks plugin for Scratch 2.0. D'you think I should add Snap! blocks, too? 

Also, n: feel like adding it to the 2.0 forums? 

bharvey wrote:

blob8108 wrote:

D'you think I should add Snap! blocks, too?

That sounds like a no-brainer but it really isn't, not if you aspire to having it be part of the Scratch site.  And it wouldn't just be blocks; it'd be things like the input type shapes too.  Still, I'd love to have that!

Ah, input shapes hadn't occurred to me. We'd need a syntax for blocks/ringed inputs... Why is it bad for Scratch, though? Too confusing?

*sigh* Snap! forums, maybe…? 

nXIII wrote:

blob8108 wrote:

Also, n: feel like adding it to the 2.0 forums? 

Sure, thanks! Mind MIT-licensing it?

It is already! 

blob8108 wrote:

Why is it bad for Scratch, though? Too confusing?

I don't think it'd be bad for Scratch.  But, even though we're all old friends, Jens and I have been trying to convince the Scratch Team for four years now to allow BYOB projects on the Scratch site without success, because they worry that users would get confused about why some things don't work in one context or the other.  Maybe it'd be different about Snap! blocks in forum posts, but maybe not.

Snap! forums, maybe…?

You bet!  But that isn't going to happen for a while.  We're not even going to have publishing of projects at first.  Jens thinks we have to get private project storage rock-solid before we branch out, and I'm terrified of the whole business of policing pornographic projects, convincing the users to be nice to each other, and DMCA takedown notices.  We're having enough trouble trying to develop a signup process that will simultaneously satisfy Hardmath, COPPA, and our education researchers!

(Since our target audience is high school students, it'd be really tempting to just forbid under-13 users, except that so many of our friends here either are now in middle school or were when we got to know them originally.  I can't get over you guys!)

Last edited by bharvey (2013-02-23 22:27:54)

bharvey wrote:

forbid under-13 users

Ah, just (barely) made it! 

So no Scratch signup?        



I looked up Smalltalk when Jens mentioned it, and I kind of liked it. My favorite part was how you can define "blocks" efficiently. I'm definitely going to borrow that when I get around to my language (temporarily called "That English Poison"; if you can guess why you get a cookie).

blob8108 wrote:

nXIII wrote:

blob8108 wrote:

Also, n: feel like adding it to the 2.0 forums? 

Sure, thanks! Mind MIT-licensing it?

It is already! 

Oops! How did I fail to notice that?

Hardmath123 wrote:

I looked up Smalltalk when Jens mentioned it, and I kind of liked it. My favorite part was how you can define "blocks" efficiently. I'm definitely going to borrow that when I get around to my language (temporarily called "That English Poison"; if you can guess why you get a cookie).

Don't borrow Squeak's implementation, though! They're not really closures (or even lambdas…), so they're not as powerful. But single- (or double-) character lambdas are awesome.

We're not using Squeak for the backend, although Squeak does have full closures since quite while (just not the old VM we're using for Scratch and BYOB), so don't worry.

Last edited by Jens (2013-02-24 13:40:19)

bharvey wrote:

technoboy10 wrote:

Should I sign up for a Snap! account now, or should I wait?

You can't sign up now -- the user interface is there, but it doesn't actually do anything yet.  But we'll announce here the moment you can sign up, don't worry!

Oh.    Okay, thanks.

bharvey wrote:

Hardmath123 wrote:

So no Scratch signup?        

There is a current way to scrape password approval off Scratch, but (1) it's going to stop working when they fully switch to the 2.0 site, and (2) it involves sending the password over the net in clear, so Jens doesn't want to use it.  The Scratch Team say they'll probably get around to providing a good (i.e., standard) way to do it eventually, but there's too much else to worry about right now, as you can imagine.

And anyway, everyone except you who commented wants a different user name!  So we are bowing to the will of the majority.

Ok, so I guess I need to think of something cooler than Hardmath123, just to keep up…



…that's tough.

Hardmath123 wrote:

bharvey wrote:

everyone except you who commented wants a different user name!

Ok, so I guess I need to think of something cooler than Hardmath123, just to keep up…

I am going to get so confused. Stick with plain "Hardmath", as Brian suggests — please? 

blob8108 wrote:

Hardmath123 wrote:

bharvey wrote:

everyone except you who commented wants a different user name!

Ok, so I guess I need to think of something cooler than Hardmath123, just to keep up…

I am going to get so confused. Stick with plain "Hardmath", as Brian suggests — please? 

Yeah.    Would you be fine with "mathy"? I'm afraid I'll get Cupertino'd and people will call me "math". I wanted to call my test account mathy_alias, but I never got around to making one. 

bharvey wrote:

Hardmath is cool, but the 123 is too much like those horrible web site signups that say "We're sorry, bharvey is taken, could we suggest bharvey827?"

Yeah, considering I was 10, it's not too bad.

imho

EDIT:  Now, Hardmath2718281828459045, that would be cool!

Well, it's easier to type Hardmathy (you need to say it to get it).