Petrichor I (Am)





I noticed you may have forgotten a period, just there.


Wow savage


I use the wait till time stamp block with increasing time stamps until I get the current time stamp.


saw that one, it’s pretty awesome
Does the getTimeStamp only give you precision down to seconds? Or can you receive milliseconds too

You can get milliseconds, my code gets hours. I think COAN’s gets milliseconds.


No, but I could change that pretty easily.
The thing is, you can’t really calculate it quick enough (with my code at least) that the milliseconds would be important.

How my code works
x = 10 (number of digits in the timestamp)
(Ability) Calculate Timestamp
    Check if  x > 0:
        Timestamp = timestamp + 10 ^ x
        Check if timestamp has passed:
            Run the ability again
            Timestamp = timestamp - 10 ^ x
            x = x - 1
            Run the ability again

So what this actually does is this:
It increases the biggest digit in the timestamp by one, until that timestamp hasn’t happened yet. Then, it goes back to what the timestamp was the iteration before, and does this with the next digit, until it comes to the smallest one.

I’ll edit this with a real screenshot tomorrow.

How did CoaN make that clock project? (Answered)

Yeah, you’re right.

I originally did it from the smallest digit back but changed it to just hours. So it’s a few hours off, and then it’s set to an odd time. So it won’t say October tenth for like three or four hours.


That’s just the time zone hopefully.

But wouldn’t counting just hours make it take longer and longer to calculate for each hour that goes?


@Madi_Hopscotch_ here are screen shots for the thanksgiving game.


image.png640x960 83.7 KB

image.png960x640 13.4 KB

Here’s the actual code

The code to determine if the timestamp has passed is in another rule. Should I show that too?

How did CoaN make that clock project? (Answered)


Yes it does. I’ve been thinking about changing it.

No wouldn’t it just be a wait til timestamp then set variable?

Edit: actually that sounds a bit off


It would, but there’s a problem with that. If, when you check if the timestamp has passed, the timestamp has not passed yet, the rule will be stuck on the wait block until the timestamp happens. In the worst case, it is one year, which would be boring to wait for.

Therefore, you’ll need several ”checking rules” (as many as there are digits in the timestamp), so that if one gets stuck, you can just use the next one. But when solving it this way, you also need to keep count of which ”checker” is free and which one is not.

That’s the best way I’ve thought of, at least.


Yeah that’s what I thought.

I can’t think of anything better


@ana in the hhc2018 project does “animated picture” mean like objects changing poses?


Wait HHC2018 already started?
How did I not know about that?


Four hours ago on the Hopscotch team account they published a project called “I hear something”.


oh no fcxdrysftighjkmnohibgvydesxrwa


Oh cool


Nindy once didn’t act like a complete mystery?


Yup. Hard to believe, I know.
@Petrichor, don’t be petrichor. Be Nindroid again