• Question

  • basic thing i don't know how to do

Varrience Ever tried using blendMode(BLUR) on CDO? I have, hahaha... the slag factory almost got richer that day...

      Varrience
      too late, asked chatgpt and it told be to put background() with an alpha of zero and it worked
      so you were right kind of

      goddamn chatgpt is useful

          ackvonhuelio oh right yea you can do that, i thought you wanted to calculate a circle with transparency while maintaining the image I've used the background trick plenty of times before had i known you wanted a background with transparency i would have told you that instantly, in fact it's mostly what i use over tint which is what tint is supposed to be used for but sucks ass oh yea also don't know if it's the same in khan but in fill or stroke you can provide arguments without needing rgb rgba hsv and so forth

          fill(0, 0, 0, 100); 
stroke(255, 0, 255, 180);

          i think i remember ethan showing me the horrors of that Ravage some of the image functions are okay but some are just pure shit

                ackvonhuelio i read "circular transparent background" which isn't transparent background must have misread lmao

                  5 months later

                  Captain_Jack_Sparrow I know I'm not ack but from my personal experience, like 75%. I'm already coding projects on KA with ease from my knowledge from CDO. But I also did do some other programming languages/websites like p5.js (which is basically the same as processing JS) and that did contribute to CDO and other JS libraries.

                  Ok but really, to try not to confuse you, both of them use JS processing so they are alike a bit.

                    Captain_Jack_Sparrow
                    i'd say it depends on what your knowledge is on CDO. It's all processing js, so more or less the same, with a few key differences:
                    1) no keyvalues or load image, so no online stuff (for the most part). this is the main appeal of CDO.
                    2) no sprites. while sprites are just constructors that could be easily recreated in KA with a little effort, the lack of the sprite editor means you have to use pjs art functions like ellipse and pushMatrix/popMatrix (push and pop on cdo). while this means that graphics are a little harder for newbies on KA, I personally think that the vector graphics of KA are better looking.
                    3) minimal sound. there are libraries people have made to be able to play sounds beyond the basic set of sound effects provided, but you can't just upload an mp3 and play it with a single function like in CDO. personally, i think this is an upside to KA as it promotes more actual programs and less of those trashy pixel art+youtube music 20 lines of code FNAF gibblescrobbleblot versus codemaster whatever things.

                    while these differences all seem to point towards the idea that CDO is better than KA, this is not taking into account the numerous benefits of KA that CDO lacks. i don't really feel like listing them all again, you can find one of my older comments if you want, but here's the gist of the benefits: faster programs, nicer/more advanced members, actual community interactions, a ton of useful tutorials, contests (official and not), blah blah blah

                        ackvonhuelio Agree with all of the above, but my appeal to code.org was solving difficult problems with with simple toolsets, be it program optimization, reverse engineering api functions to find exploitable bugs, navigating concurrency with key values, or creating encoding/decoding mechanisms for networking. That's why even though I felt like I was grossly overqualified to develop on a children's site, it was infinitely more fun than programming in environments where tools were already available to me. Khan Academy has none of these things. It is trivial to break sandbox with function.constructor, and the program is isolated in an iframe so there is no physical way to access other websites. Your mistake was equating more features with better, and that's not always true

                            ackvonhuelio pushing software to it's limits is always fun. It's the original definition of "hacking" before the media misused it to refer to cyber criminals (or "crackers") leaving the term "hacker" with a negative connotation.

                              Chat