Scratch

how would i fix a glitch in my mod? when i load a project with a 'forever' block, it turns into a 'repeat until obsolete' block. please help! do i have to make a 'compadability mode' like billeyedward's STREAK mod?

comp500 wrote:

Joeman592 wrote:

comp500 wrote:

Can i have:

create sprite [] run code
         (code)
<end>

With the spec?
It creates a sprite named[] and runs the code on it.
Comp500:)

i think the creat sprite is good and then with code would be good too. I'll try to make em but im not very good with squeak so LS97 or nXIII will also have to do it. They are MUCH MUCH(times 9999999999999999999999) better than me.

Me too.

hmm... use nXIII's script to duplicate it, and then add that broadcast bit to run on clones only. that should be close enough to wha you want

Sperry wrote:

Jakey22 wrote:

I need some code for a  <[] contains []> block.

I think it is:

Code:

if: t1 contains: t2
^ (t1 findString: t2)

Does that work?

I tried it and it didn't work, although I might have written the block-specs wrong. also, it is supposed to be a boolean.

Joeman592 wrote:

pyrodon wrote:

Joeman592 wrote:

put it in sensing. Scratch-objects, scritpable sprite(or stage, put it in both)morph, sensing. Put the code in blah blah blah, then go to class and make the spec. do it again for the stage/sprite morph(if you did one or the other first) if you want it to be a bounce at te end, put it in motion.

I tried, but I get the error:

Code:

 Message not understood: Bounds
Symbol(Object)>>error:
[] in PasteUpMorph>>runStepMethods
[] in BlockContext>>ifError:
Symbol(Object)>>error:
Symbol(Object)>>doesNotUnderstand:
ScratchSpriteMorph>>sprite:touching:
ReporterBlockMorph(CommandBlockMorph)>>evaluateWithArgs:
ScratchProcess>>applyPrimitive
ScratchProcess>>evaluateCommandFor:
ScratchProcess>>evaluateFor:

Maybe I have the wrong codes or something. Anyone know a code that they are sure works?

well... i dont... anyway, i don't get what this code is. could you put the actual code without the error messages? then we can see if its wrong

Ok, sorry. Here it is:

 

sprite: t1 touching: t2 
    | t3 |
    t3 _ t1 bounds intersect: t2 bounds.
    (t3 width > 0 and: [t3 height > 0])
        ifTrue: [^ true].
    ^ false

I got it from LS97's post on page 2. Maybe I even have the block spec wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's right. Plus, the "Bounds" error doesn't seem to have anything to do with a wrong block spec.

ScratchReallyROCKS wrote:

no instance needed

WHY MUST YOU REFER TO THEM AS INSTANCES?!

Gosh, people, learn your vocab! Instances are objects with classes as their data types!

It's called a message or a method.

Joeman592 wrote:

Catwalk923 wrote:

HELP!!! I can't find the code grabFromScreen!!! How do I add it? I tried the block, but it does not know what #grabFromSceen means! HELP!!!

are you using scratch 1.3 or 1.4 it might matter. also, try just copying and pasting if you didn't already do that

I have 1.4, and copy what???

ScratchReallyROCKS wrote:

nXIII wrote:

ScratchReallyROCKS wrote:

no instance needed

WHY MUST YOU REFER TO THEM AS INSTANCES?!

Gosh, people, learn your vocab! Instances are objects with classes as their data types!

It's called a message or a method.

Than why is the tab in the VM called 'instances'

It's called "instance". BIG DIFFERENCE!

"'create sprite with name []'" block? and if that is possible, how about "'create sprite with name [] and code' #c" AND how about "'create sprite with name [] , code,' #c and draw costume'" that might be too much... but please try cuz i cant make em

Catwalk923 wrote:

Joeman592 wrote:

Catwalk923 wrote:

HELP!!! I can't find the code grabFromScreen!!! How do I add it? I tried the block, but it does not know what #grabFromSceen means! HELP!!!

are you using scratch 1.3 or 1.4 it might matter. also, try just copying and pasting if you didn't already do that

I have 1.4, and copy what???

are you running the code in the stage?? if you are try using it in a sprite.

Last edited by comp500 (2010-05-16 03:22:36)

PANTHER IS OUT!!!

It lets you go into the code to find how a block is made.

Sadly, the "received?" block doesn't work, so we'll have to go without it until the panther team fixes the bug. I might add that a lot of the watchers cause an error 

Anyway, this is really exciting!!! 

randalpik wrote:

PANTHER IS OUT!!!

It lets you go into the code to find how a block is made.

Sadly, the "received?" block doesn't work, so we'll have to go without it until the panther team fixes the bug. I might add that a lot of the watchers cause an error 

Anyway, this is really exciting!!! 

It does work, like this:

When =/ clicked
broadcast something


When I receive something
wait (5)

PUT HAT HERE
wait until something is recieved
DO SOMETHING HERE


After the 'when I receive ___" script is done, it reports false, that's what wait 5 is for.

When Sep explained it, I think I get it now.

Ok, here is the code (credit to Panther team, I guess that I have to say that now that Sep is monitoring the forum. Oh, and nxIII threatened to sue me if I didn't put this: "Panther is developed by the scratch users Sparks, nXIII, Sperry, SeptimusHeap, MathWizz, and Markyparky56 and is based on Scratch from the MIT media labs." I mean, seriously? Do I really have to put all the members of the panther team? Anyway...):

eventReceivedNamed: t1 
    | t2 t3 |
    self isSprite ifTrue: [^ (self ownerThatIsA: ScratchStageMorph)
            eventReceivedNamed: t1].
    t2 _ self scripts
                select: [:t4 | t4 class == EventHatMorph and: [t4 eventName caseInsensitiveEqual: t1]].
    t2 _ t2 asOrderedCollection.
    self
        submorphsDo: [:t5 | (t5 isKindOf: ScriptableScratchMorph)
                ifTrue: [(t5 scripts
                        select: [:t4 | t4 class == EventHatMorph and: [t4 eventName caseInsensitiveEqual: t1]])
                        do: [:t6 | t2 _ t2 copyWith: t6]]].
    t3 _ t2 select: [:t4 | t4 scratchProc notNil].
    ^ t3 size > 0

And, for the squeak noobs in the forum, here is the spec:

('%e received?' #b #eventReceivedNamed:)

That should work. I didn't test the spec.

Last edited by randalpik (2010-05-16 21:08:03)