Scratch
archived forums
#1 2010-08-14 11:02:26
- steppenwulf
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-07-23
- Posts: 1000+
We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
A boolean is a diamond shapped block, right? If that's true, than I need it. It's kinda hard to do the stuff I need to do without it 
Last edited by steppenwulf (2010-08-14 11:03:24)
I'm graduating HS this April and going to college in the Fall.
Offline
#2 2010-08-14 20:17:19
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Paddle2See suggested this in Scratch Suggestions already - it's doing well, maybe it'll get approved. 
But then again extra topics don't really hurt. xP
I fall: It's a tragedy. You fall: It's comedy.
Hmph enjoy your fall - I get a lovely spring... without pans of new leaves.
Offline
#3 2010-08-14 20:38:35
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Chrischb wrote:
Paddle2See suggested this in Scratch Suggestions already - it's doing well, maybe it'll get approved.
But then again extra topics don't really hurt. xP
lol yes! 
We do need one. It would seriously make making games a lot easier.
-End Transmission-
Offline
#4 2010-08-14 21:03:21
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Including 1s1s projects.
But that takes some of the challenge out, taking part of the fun also. 
I fall: It's a tragedy. You fall: It's comedy.
Hmph enjoy your fall - I get a lovely spring... without pans of new leaves.
Offline
#5 2010-08-14 21:11:47
- Sunrise-Moon
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-06-27
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
You don't really need it- just use a variable, and if the thing is true, set it to 1, and remember to set it to 0 when you aren't using it.
Offline
#6 2010-08-14 21:37:24
- Lucario621
- Community Moderator
- Registered: 2007-10-03
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
I personally disagree with the idea.
Can you describe why you need it/ how it would extremely make things better? Because as I mentioned before on Scratch Suggestions:
Lucario621 wrote:
[...] broadcasts are events - not true or false statements. A big flaw with this is, a broadcast happens for less than a second; only for one frame, and thus, couldn't a script accidentally skip one the broadcast?
Overall, it would all of the time miss the broadcast. The way a broadcast works, is it just finds all of the hat blocks with the broadcast, and starts them - nothing else really.
Offline
#7 2010-08-14 23:04:08
- steppenwulf
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-07-23
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Sunrise-Moon wrote:
You don't really need it- just use a variable, and if the thing is true, set it to 1, and remember to set it to 0 when you aren't using it.
Well I know that, but here's the thing. For the game I'm developing, I would need DOZENS of "if thing is true, set it to 1" variables. And I would need just as many scripts for each idividual one. I need a simple way to do all of this, so I can reduce lag.
@Lucario- Basically I need it to reduce lag. Because I would have to many "if thing is true blah blah blah" scripts floating around, making it extremely laggy.
And it would work because you could put a <I recieve [ ]> block inside of a "wait until" block so it would wait to get a certain broadcast to perform a certain action.
Last edited by steppenwulf (2010-08-14 23:07:59)
I'm graduating HS this April and going to college in the Fall.
Offline
#8 2010-08-14 23:13:17
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
It should be called "() received", I guess - and that's what Paddle2See did in his suggestion.
I fall: It's a tragedy. You fall: It's comedy.
Hmph enjoy your fall - I get a lovely spring... without pans of new leaves.
Offline
#9 2010-08-14 23:33:01
- Sunrise-Moon
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-06-27
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
steppenwulf wrote:
Sunrise-Moon wrote:
You don't really need it- just use a variable, and if the thing is true, set it to 1, and remember to set it to 0 when you aren't using it.
Well I know that, but here's the thing. For the game I'm developing, I would need DOZENS of "if thing is true, set it to 1" variables. And I would need just as many scripts for each idividual one. I need a simple way to do all of this, so I can reduce lag.
@Lucario- Basically I need it to reduce lag. Because I would have to many "if thing is true blah blah blah" scripts floating around, making it extremely laggy.
And it would work because you could put a <I recieve [ ]> block inside of a "wait until" block so it would wait to get a certain broadcast to perform a certain action.
Use a list.
Offline
#10 2010-08-14 23:38:45
- steppenwulf
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-07-23
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Sunrise-Moon wrote:
steppenwulf wrote:
Sunrise-Moon wrote:
You don't really need it- just use a variable, and if the thing is true, set it to 1, and remember to set it to 0 when you aren't using it.
Well I know that, but here's the thing. For the game I'm developing, I would need DOZENS of "if thing is true, set it to 1" variables. And I would need just as many scripts for each idividual one. I need a simple way to do all of this, so I can reduce lag.
@Lucario- Basically I need it to reduce lag. Because I would have to many "if thing is true blah blah blah" scripts floating around, making it extremely laggy.
And it would work because you could put a <I recieve [ ]> block inside of a "wait until" block so it would wait to get a certain broadcast to perform a certain action.Use a list.
That's still to much scripting to be done I need a heavily simplified way to do what I need to be done, and "() received" would workk perfectly.
I'm graduating HS this April and going to college in the Fall.
Offline
#11 2010-08-14 23:58:09
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Sunrise-Moon wrote:
You don't really need it- just use a variable, and if the thing is true, set it to 1, and remember to set it to 0 when you aren't using it.
That would work, or use a list.
Hai.
Offline
#12 2010-08-15 00:05:04
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Maybe it would be a fun programming exercise to learn how to efficiently use those variables. Don't underestimate the power of programming
It takes away from the challenge of programming if every solution is handed to you on a silver platter
Offline
#14 2010-08-15 00:35:10
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
coolstuff wrote:
Maybe it would be a fun programming exercise to learn how to efficiently use those variables. Don't underestimate the power of programming
It takes away from the challenge of programming if every solution is handed to you on a silver platter
Agreed, but would you enjoy making a perfect calculator without lists?
I fall: It's a tragedy. You fall: It's comedy.
Hmph enjoy your fall - I get a lovely spring... without pans of new leaves.
Offline
#15 2010-08-15 01:22:10
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
Chrischb wrote:
coolstuff wrote:
Maybe it would be a fun programming exercise to learn how to efficiently use those variables. Don't underestimate the power of programming
It takes away from the challenge of programming if every solution is handed to you on a silver platterAgreed, but would you enjoy making a perfect calculator without lists?
I agree.
It's seriously a block that simplified quite a bit of unnecessary programming. 
-End Transmission-
Offline
#18 2010-08-15 01:37:10
- Jonathanpb
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2008-07-25
- Posts: 1000+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
I think we would all like that block.
"Human beings... must have action; and they will make it if they cannot find it.
-Charlotte Brontë
Offline
#20 2010-08-15 10:51:08
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
As an elaboration: my previous post, which if you don't remember was this:
me wrote:
Maybe it would be a fun programming exercise to learn how to efficiently use those variables. Don't underestimate the power of programming
It takes away from the challenge of programming if every solution is handed to you on a silver platter
didn't necessarily mean that I didn't support. I was just trying to get people's hopes up for the time being. Also, I never said anything about not using lists
Offline
#21 2010-08-15 12:20:17
- Billybob-Mario
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2008-01-05
- Posts: 500+
Re: We need a boolean <I recieve [ ]> block :|
It's in many mods, such as Slash, but it doesn't work very well.
, my Scratch mod! Now with customizable color scheme!Offline