miniepicness wrote:

any replies?

miniepicness wrote:

now, the scratch team removed the while loop,
but it works perfectly fine

I think they should add it back so that new scratchers can learn how to use this block!


Sorry if this post is not descriptive enough, tell me what else to add.

repeat until <not <>>

end

duckboycool wrote:

miniepicness wrote:

now, the scratch team removed the while loop,
but it works perfectly fine

I think they should add it back so that new scratchers can learn how to use this block!


Sorry if this post is not descriptive enough, tell me what else to add.

No support.

repeat until <not <>>

end

It got removed for a reason.

Also, with the click start button twice, just put a wait block before your scripts, and it works every time.

duckboycool wrote:

They removed it since it was useless, like forever if. Two block workarounds do not need to warrant a block.

The workarounds work fine and are so simple.

miniepicness wrote:

duckboycool wrote:

They removed it since it was useless, like forever if. Two block workarounds do not need to warrant a block.

The workarounds work fine and are so simple.

but they didnt remove it, they removed it from the block pick section
its still in the code

repeat until <not <condition :: grey>> // Functions the same as the suggestion
function :: grey
end

The4thPixel wrote:

NO SUPPORT ITS WORKAROUNDABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Um, I don't know who put that there. I don't have a need to constantly be pushing down on Caps Lock. But yes, the suggestion is workaroundable.

repeat until <not <condition :: grey>> // Functions the same as the suggestion
function :: grey
end

Frankly, the workaround isn't difficult… to most of us. Think about the New Scratchers, people. I doubt anyone knew how this workaround worked at least until they had been using the program for at least a month. Plus it would save time on everyone's part, especially when working with long and lag-inducing booleans. So I'll support.

duckboycool wrote:

miniepicness wrote:

duckboycool wrote:

They removed it since it was useless, like forever if. Two block workarounds do not need to warrant a block.

The workarounds work fine and are so simple.

but they didnt remove it, they removed it from the block pick section
its still in the code

Your point, it's not worth the time to remove it. It just wasn't valuable enough.

MathlyCat wrote:

duckboycool wrote:

miniepicness wrote:

duckboycool wrote:

They removed it since it was useless, like forever if. Two block workarounds do not need to warrant a block.

The workarounds work fine and are so simple.

but they didnt remove it, they removed it from the block pick section
its still in the code

Your point, it's not worth the time to remove it. It just wasn't valuable enough.

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

MathlyCat wrote:

-snip-

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

duckboycool wrote:

MathlyCat wrote:

-snip-

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

The while block fits into this category for the workaround being extremely easy. Also, it means nothing to add it back in. Two blocks. We don't support the easier following topic for being too easy, this is the same.

duckboycool wrote:

MathlyCat wrote:

-snip-

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

The while block fits into this category for the workaround being extremely easy. Also, it means nothing to add it back in. Two blocks. We don't support the easier following topic for being too easy, this is the same.

go to x: (0) y: (0)

set x to (0)
set y to (0)

alexphan wrote:

duckboycool wrote:

MathlyCat wrote:

-snip-

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

The while block fits into this category for the workaround being extremely easy. Also, it means nothing to add it back in. Two blocks. We don't support the easier following topic for being too easy, this is the same.

So let's remove

go to x: (0) y: (0)

because it has a two-block workaround.

set x to (0)
set y to (0)

_

I honestly agree with this idea because a lot of programming languages already have a while loop (like Java, Python, and Ruby ) and this would eliminate some confusion and people asking “What are those random red blocks I see in some projects?? And some of them work???????????”

duckboycool wrote:

MathlyCat wrote:

-snip-

1. While loops are in other languages while forever loops are not.
2. Forever If was removed for purpose of its workaround being blatantly easy. I don't see how and why the While block fits in this category, not only would it improve the change from scratch to other languages, it would make projects easier to make and add a new level of complexity.

Your only reasoning is ‘oh workaround and it’s gone so it doesn't deserve to be re-added'

The while block fits into this category for the workaround being extremely easy. Also, it means nothing to add it back in. Two blocks. We don't support the easier following topic for being too easy, this is the same.

(() - (0))

(() + (-0))

MathlyCat wrote:

It also provides a new way to run a project without having to use the Green Flag