ocular rewritten

I think that a very helpful thing would be to add more logic blocks. Right now, we have the classics:

<not <>>
<<> and <>>
<<> or <>>

However, I feel like there would be a lot more flexibility if the Scratch team implemented these:

<<> xor <>> :: operators
<<> nand <>> :: operators
<<> nor <>> :: operators
<<> xnor <>> :: operators

This would create a lot more opportunity to create better control flow without needing to string together tons of and, not, and or blocks.

Support. No idea what these do but they seem useful.

Gamer_Logan819 wrote:

Support. No idea what these do but they seem useful.

This explains it:
Truth Table

blockygenius37 wrote:

<<> nand <>> :: operators

<<not <...>> or <not <...>>>

106809nes wrote:

blockygenius37 wrote:

<<> nor <>> :: operators

<<not <...>> or <not <...>>>

incorrect

<not <<> or <>>>

<but (username)>

_gobo_

medians wrote:

Truth Table

That makes it appear that these have incredibly easy workarounds.

Xor

<not <<condition::grey> = <condition::grey>>>

(this workaround for xor is from another post that I can’t find the link to, not me. the rest r me tho)

Nand

<not <<condition::grey> and <condition::grey>>>

Nor

<not <<condition::grey> or <condition::grey>>

Xnor

<<condition::grey> = <condition::grey>>

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.
So no support.

starlightsparker wrote:

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.

Yes, I understand the workarounds, but I am incredibly confused by the names of these blocks.

cactus-cacti wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.

Yes, I understand the workarounds, but I am incredibly confused by the names of these blocks.

Same honestly- it took me a good minute to process what the names mean lol

if this works i will be so happy

<<...> and <...> and <...>>
<<> or <> or <>>
(join [] [] [])
<[] and not []>

IT WORKED so heres more

stop [scratch]
previous costume
create clone of [ur mom] at x: (x position) y: (y position) dir: (direction) with condition: <...>

plssss

starlightsparker wrote:

cactus-cacti wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.

Yes, I understand the workarounds, but I am incredibly confused by the names of these blocks.

Same honestly- it took me a good minute to process what the names mean lol

Well, kids who get into proper programming will have an easier understanding when they move on, right?

(join [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] )
if (timer) then
(loudness)
end
turn video [sideways]

bruhhhimnoon wrote:

if this works i will be so happy

<<...> and <...> and <...>>
<<> or <> or <>>
(join [] [] [])
<[] and not []>

when stop clicked::hat

plssss

Please create your own topics for these.

but uh, here’s workarounds
For

<<…> and <…> and <...>::operators 

You can do

<<…> and <<…> and <…>>

for

<<…> or <…> or <…>::operators

You can do

<<…> or <<…> or <…>>>

For

(join […] […] […]::operators)

You can do

(join […] (join […] […]))

GlitchedThrough wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

cactus-cacti wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.

Yes, I understand the workarounds, but I am incredibly confused by the names of these blocks.

Same honestly- it took me a good minute to process what the names mean lol

Well, kids who get into proper programming will have an easier understanding when they move on, right?

I mean, understanding those when they get into proper programming can’t be that hard. Scratch doesn’t need everything that real coding languages use.

starlightsparker wrote:

GlitchedThrough wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

cactus-cacti wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

honestly, the workaround are easier to understand then the actual blocks.

Yes, I understand the workarounds, but I am incredibly confused by the names of these blocks.

Same honestly- it took me a good minute to process what the names mean lol

Well, kids who get into proper programming will have an easier understanding when they move on, right?

I mean, understanding those when they get into proper programming can’t be that hard. Scratch doesn’t need everything that real coding languages use.

I still have difficulties remembering logic gates.
Start then early so they'll remember well

starlightsparker wrote:

bruhhhimnoon wrote:

if this works i will be so happy

<<...> and <...> and <...>>
<<> or <> or <>>
(join [] [] [])
<[] and not []>

when stop clicked::hat

plssss

Please create your own topics for these.

but uh, here’s workarounds
For

<<…> and <…> and <...>::operators 

You can do

<<…> and <<…> and <…>>

for

<<…> or <…> or <…>::operators

You can do

<<…> or <<…> or <…>>>

For

(join […] […] […]::operators)

You can do

(join […] (join […] […]))

1. I'm sorry.
2. I know you can do this like that but it would be really convenient if they added those
3. idk how to make a topic

support. this will be handy to so many people when they learn to use them right.

bruhhhimnoon wrote:

starlightsparker wrote:

bruhhhimnoon wrote:

if this works i will be so happy

<<...> and <...> and <...>>
<<> or <> or <>>
(join [] [] [])
<[] and not []>

when stop clicked::hat

plssss

Please create your own topics for these.

but uh, here’s workarounds
For

<<…> and <…> and <...>::operators 

You can do

<<…> and <<…> and <…>>

for

<<…> or <…> or <…>::operators

You can do

<<…> or <<…> or <…>>>

For

(join […] […] […]::operators)

You can do

(join […] (join […] […]))

1. I'm sorry.
2. I know you can do this like that but it would be really convenient if they added those
3. idk how to make a topic

1. No worries
2. A lot of things will be convenient, but when the workarounds are easy it’s just a waste of scratch’s time and resources.
3. Go to https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/1 and click “New Topic”. Keep in mind the page I linked is for the suggestions subforum, so if the topic you want to make isn’t a suggestion, go to a different subforum by navigating to scratch.mit.edu/discuss and choosing a subforum.