ShadowFlareX wrote:

…Whilst ‘any sprite’ is even worse because that's literally as inspecific as it gets.

Jump
(word ( v) of [asdf1234! dskop])

ShadowFlareX wrote:

But it d

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

This is bad because it simply detects if it's touching another sprite, which is kind of useless.

Not necessarily. You could say the same for this.

<touching color [#828282] ?>

“This is bad because it simply detects if it's touching a colour, which is kind of useless.”

Ahahaha!!! That's where you're wrong.
This block only detects one colour, but the thing is ‘one color’ can come out as grey, green, blue, black, red, magenta, blue, or any other color in the light spectrum.
Edit: Whilst ‘any sprite’ is even worse because that's literally as inspecific as it gets.
Now if the suggestion was for sprite categories/groups, I wouldn't complain.

rdococ wrote:

There should be sprite groups. You would be able to put sprites into certain groups, like Lava for all sprites made of lava, or Solid for solid things.

Then, you would be able to detect if your sprite was touching any sprite that is in a certain group.

<<touching [any sprite v] ?> and < <touching color [#F06E2E] ?>>>

Alberknyis wrote:

Explain where an “any sprite touched” block could be used.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

In what situation would this be useful for?

Projects that involve sprite-scanning, for some projects that involve just touching a sprite in general (Like a scanner that checks for sprites), it takes a long time to write “if touching Sprite2 or if touching Sprite3, etc.”. It would be fairly easy to implement, and otherwise…

<<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or < > > > >> > >  > > 

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

Explain where an “any sprite touched” block could be used.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

In what situation would this be useful for?

Projects that involve sprite-scanning, for some projects that involve just touching a sprite in general (Like a scanner that checks for sprites), it takes a long time to write “if touching Sprite2 or if touching Sprite3, etc.”. It would be fairly easy to implement, and otherwise…

<<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or < > > > >> > >  > > 

ShadowFlareX wrote:

Inspecific is correct. Unspecific is also correct.

add [MagmaBaddie] to [  Lava Thingsv]
if <<touching [any sprite v] ?> and < <[Lava Things v] contains [(SpriteName) ]>>> then
    
say [Lava!]
end

add [MagmaBaddie] to [  Lava Things v]
if <<touching [any sprite v] ?> and <[Lava Things v] contains [ (SpriteName)  ]>> then
    say [Lava!]
end

Alberknyis wrote:

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

Explain where an “any sprite touched” block could be used.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

In what situation would this be useful for?

Projects that involve sprite-scanning, for some projects that involve just touching a sprite in general (Like a scanner that checks for sprites), it takes a long time to write “if touching Sprite2 or if touching Sprite3, etc.”. It would be fairly easy to implement, and otherwise…

<<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or < > > > >> > >  > > 

Hmm. Well we can combine that with sprite grouping. That can let us detect multiple walls and deadly objects simultaneously with minimal scripts. Pretty good.

+0.9

By sprite grouping imagine some folders which you can insert sprites into, and use the folder name for things like “touching sprite”, to check for all sprites in the folder.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

Explain where an “any sprite touched” block could be used.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

In what situation would this be useful for?

Projects that involve sprite-scanning, for some projects that involve just touching a sprite in general (Like a scanner that checks for sprites), it takes a long time to write “if touching Sprite2 or if touching Sprite3, etc.”. It would be fairly easy to implement, and otherwise…

<<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or < > > > >> > >  > > 

Hmm. Well we can combine that with sprite grouping. That can let us detect multiple walls and deadly objects simultaneously with minimal scripts. Pretty good.

+0.9

By sprite grouping imagine some folders which you can insert sprites into, and use the folder name for things like “touching sprite”, to check for all sprites in the folder.

What about the 0.1?

Alberknyis wrote:

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

IronBit_Studios wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

Explain where an “any sprite touched” block could be used.

IronBit_Studios wrote:

ShadowFlareX wrote:

In what situation would this be useful for?

Projects that involve sprite-scanning, for some projects that involve just touching a sprite in general (Like a scanner that checks for sprites), it takes a long time to write “if touching Sprite2 or if touching Sprite3, etc.”. It would be fairly easy to implement, and otherwise…

<<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or <<touching [ v] ?> or < > > > >> > >  > > 

Hmm. Well we can combine that with sprite grouping. That can let us detect multiple walls and deadly objects simultaneously with minimal scripts. Pretty good.

+0.9

By sprite grouping imagine some folders which you can insert sprites into, and use the folder name for things like “touching sprite”, to check for all sprites in the folder.

What about the 0.1?

I lost it.

Jk, it's just that I don't fully support just yet.

Cyoce wrote:

Support! This would be very useful! However, “If touching sprite” sounds like an existing block. I suggest you rename the post to “ New Block Idea— ‘Touching Any Sprite?’ ”

<touching [any sprite v] ?>