To break out of C's.
Like this: Or maybe just
Useful for when you have a bunch of C blocks in one script, and can't use stop script.
This idea is a little obsolete, look here for the improved one.
EDIT: roijac put this on Scratch Suggestions! Vote here!
EDIT2: I just got this link, which is the "break" feature in other programming languages! Check it out if you don't understand what I want.
Supporters: (12)
mathematics
coolstuff
Harakou
markyparky56
supergarfield
LS97
Dinoclor
CloneCommando1
jslomba
roijac
procSsyn
CI11932
DigiTechs
nickbrickmaster
Last edited by scimonster (2011-07-17 01:19:12)
Offline
That's a good idea. I often use something similar in Visual Basic.
Offline
Couldn't you just use the [repeat until < >] block?
Offline
Jonathanpb wrote:
Couldn't you just use the [repeat until < >] block?
Sometimes, but not always.
I think you should actually be able to choose how many C's to break out of, 'cause if it is in a solitary if, it would just break that if.
Last edited by scimonster (2011-07-10 04:51:35)
Offline
You know, that actually does sound quite nice. But you made a good point about choosing how many "Cs" to break out of, because it would probably be in an "if" block to work, and that would just complete the point of it all. But then it might get rather confusing... Ah, well, it is a nice block.
Offline
I think it's agreed we need something a little more advance than just plain
So maybe or
Maybe even both combined!
What do you think now?
Offline
scimonster wrote:
I think it's agreed we need something a little more advanced than just plain
So maybe or
Maybe even both combined!
What do you think now?
That last one should have been a stack block instead of cap block. I'm too lazy to upload another pic.
And: bump!
Last edited by scimonster (2011-02-03 09:38:53)
Offline
I support! This would make a great addition to scratch.
Offline
markyparky56 wrote:
I support! This would make a great addition to scratch.
Thanks!
Offline
supergarfield wrote:
i support
Thanks! I think I'll start a supporters list.
Offline
Offline
peterkap wrote:
0_0
?
Offline
I support your latest suggestion, not the first one. I think it's more complete
Anyways yeah, a great idea!
Offline
LS97 wrote:
I support your latest suggestion, not the first one. I think it's more complete
Anyways yeah, a great idea!
Thanks. I also realized that the original was off a little. I'll add you to supporters list!
Offline
bump.
Offline
Hmmm... I can't see any of those photos, so I'm not sure what you mean.
Offline
Pecola1 wrote:
Hmmm... I can't see any of those photos, so I'm not sure what you mean.
Original: __ ______________________ | |_| | | break out of a C block | |_________________________| __ _____ | |_| | | break | |________| Improved: __ _________________________ | |_| | | break out of (2) C blocks | |____________________________| __ __________ | |_| | | if <> break | |_ __________| |_| __ ______________________________ | |_| | | if <> break out of (2) C blocks | |_ ______________________________| |_|
Do you like them?
Offline
EzekielE wrote:
I don't understand, break?
remind me what a c block is
Yeah, I dont know what a c block is either! :-)
Offline
emboar30 wrote:
EzekielE wrote:
I don't understand, break?
remind me what a c block isYeah, I dont know what a c block is either! :-)
C Block.
Leave the C block is what I want to do.
Offline
I can see this as really helpful... I support!
Offline
The break out of () c blocks... I don't see the point, there is no text-based language equivalent, you get breaks and switches, the two tend to go hand in hand, but if you're a good coder, then you don't need multiple break blocks, you sort of daisy chain them.
Offline