While playing around with the combine block, I found out it now supports 5 input slots (4 if the block isn't compiled), as long as they're used with the input names field. While testing, I found out that the fifth parameter returns the current process (extra parameter for jsf).  Not only that, but it only works if the fifth parameter is in a reporter block. [/edit] I was just wondering why you would need to use that in the block. Or is it used internally to help with the compiling process or something?
Edit: I think I know why that happened. Its purpose is changed to that of the call block, so it gets that extra parameter just like the call block when compiled.
Also, shouldn't the input names be names rather than #n?
We did not name the formal parameters of the function input to
combine "so far", value, index, list", because you - quite adamantly so - made me take that naming out after convincing me that we don't want users to think about how combine traverses a list. I'm actually very happy with that decision! I left in the functionality that you can use the other two parameters, but this is now really an undocumented "easter egg".
Oh yeah! I'm losing my mind. That conversation wasn't even very long ago.
list would be fine. Although, I dunno, it's weird that index starts at 2... maybe it's okay as is.
Do you have an answer for @helicoptur about the fifth input?
I don't know what @helicoptur is talking about. We always pass in a reference to the process when calling a JS function, not anywhere else.
I'm quite annoyed and disappointed by questions such as this one. Posing them in the "Help with Snap!" and "Snap! Editor" areas makes it appear that there's something to discover which isn't there. We're not even exposing the experimental "compile" reporter to users, so why are people talking about it as if you couldn't use Snap without it, or as if you could do things in Snap with it you couldn't do without it? I don't like to see these kinds of questions, because it's precisely the kind of ominous enigmatic stuff that drives away those we're really trying to reach with Snap, because they will get the impression that they're missing out on the "big secrets" all the cool kids know about.
My hunch is that these aren't questions but threads whose main purpose is to get our attention that somebody is a "Snap hacker". I'm so not interested in answering them, and I want it to be known that I won't. If You wanna be a "hacker" savant of Snap's innards, read da code, but don't boast about it. For all others, there's nothing to see here, please move on.
Oh, Jens, don't dump on kids like that. Nobody said "you can't use Snap! without it" or anything close. The OP says:
You want to prohibit kids being curious about how Snap! works?
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.