GammaGames@beehaw.org
on 08 Jan 2025 18:30
collapse
I think to make sure they don’t clash with existing identifiers
frezik@midwest.social
on 08 Jan 2025 18:45
collapse
I could understand declaring with –foo, but then referencing should be either var(foo) or just –foo, not the combination var(–foo). I don’t get why the grammar has to work that way.
joachim@drupal.community
on 08 Jan 2025 18:15
nextcollapse
cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Jan 2025 18:35
nextcollapse
still can’t do mixins and extends though. :(
unmagical@lemmy.ml
on 08 Jan 2025 18:37
nextcollapse
I, uh, hate that radius calculation. Why does the radius need to be reactive? What do you stand to gain over just setting to like 3 or 4px and moving on with your life?
x00z@lemmy.world
on 08 Jan 2025 19:44
nextcollapse
Oof, I might have wooshed there. Totally read that comment as criticizing my inquiry as things a Jr would ask and not as the implementation being “look what I as a Jr can do!”
pcouy@lemmy.pierre-couy.fr
on 09 Jan 2025 06:28
collapse
I’m not sure how this relates to the shared post. I’m just searched the article for “radius” and only found one example where a variable is defined then used later. Were you talking about this ? Or can you clarify what “radius calculation” you hate ?
lucas@startrek.website
on 09 Jan 2025 10:25
collapse
They’re referring (I believe) to the screenshot right at the top of the article, which includes this absurd calculation:
My guess (hope!) is that this is not ‘serious’ code, but padding for the sake of a screenshot to demonstrate that it’s possible to use each of these different features (not that you should!).
pcouy@lemmy.pierre-couy.fr
on 09 Jan 2025 10:43
nextcollapse
Oh I missed this. I think it’s only here to showcase doing math between different units, which is really nice in my opinion. I’m thinking about a few instances where I had to resort to dirty JS hacks just because CSS did not support this at the time
It‘s used in Facebooks css. Remembered it from a nice article from Ahmad Shadeed. And while this limbo sure has some usefulness, it‘s way too obscure to use for the fun of it.
To add to this:
CSS really has come a long way. This border-radius example can be done with Container Queries by now, which has quite good support already.
TCB13@lemmy.world
on 08 Jan 2025 19:02
nextcollapse
Yeah CSS is now decent. The only problem is that the nesting is not very well supported yet. It’s something like only browsers > 2023 and let’s be realistic people run old machines.
pinchy@lemmy.world
on 08 Jan 2025 20:18
nextcollapse
Definitely not widely supported enough. Made the switch from sass back to css quite a while ago and let postcss polyfill less supported features like nesting.
Yeah, I was reading about PostCSS the other day, but still too lazy to change my environment. To be fair I only need the nesting polyfill and some kind of minifier, the rest I can live with native stuff.
Lightning CSS is also great. A minifier at its core but also includes transpiling for older browser
pcouy@lemmy.pierre-couy.fr
on 09 Jan 2025 06:34
nextcollapse
We still see somewhat old browsers, especially from people using Safari on Apple devices (because IIRC it only updates when you update the whole OS). But it’s a lot better than it used to be thanks to most browser having auto-updates
Until you find they’re using and old version of macOS… or Windows 8. 😂
Paradox@lemdro.id
on 08 Jan 2025 23:24
nextcollapse
I still reach for sass for a lot of things, but now you don’t have to, which is really nice
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Jan 2025 03:08
nextcollapse
HTML tends to absorb all its best kludges. I put off learning JQuery for so long that the features I wanted became standard.
Cratermaker@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Jan 2025 06:20
collapse
Good riddance, I say. Web dev is infested with layers upon layers of tools that attempt to abstract what is already fairly simple and straightforward to work with. We’re beyond the days of needing to build buttons out of small image fragments, and JS is (slowly) becoming more livable in its raw form. I welcome anything that keeps the toolchain as simple as possible.
shortrounddev@lemmy.world
on 24 Jan 15:26
collapse
At my company I start all new projects without a framework. I try to write things in templated backend frameworks with no javascript on the frontend. If I need javascript, I try to use web components, styled with modular css in the shadow dom.
However, this sometimes requires an absurd amount of build tool configuration with webpack in order to get static asset and typescript loading working just perfectly. I end up kind of just writing my own framework instead
threaded - newest
I like that css now has variables, but why that syntax?
.
I think to make sure they don’t clash with existing identifiers
I could understand declaring with
–foo, but then referencing should be eithervar(foo)or just–foo, not the combinationvar(–foo). I don’t get why the grammar has to work that way.@pcouy The URL is broken.
It seems to be working for me, it’s weird. I’ve updated the post with the same URL anyway, and you can try …bus-hit.me/…/goodbye-sass-welcome-back-native-cs… if that still does not work
still can’t do mixins and extends though. :(
I, uh, hate that radius calculation. Why does the radius need to be reactive? What do you stand to gain over just setting to like 3 or 4px and moving on with your life?
Junior webdev points.
Cool. Help me learn then by answering my questions.
He did
AKA you gain nothing.
Oof, I might have wooshed there. Totally read that comment as criticizing my inquiry as things a Jr would ask and not as the implementation being “look what I as a Jr can do!”
I’m not sure how this relates to the shared post. I’m just searched the article for “radius” and only found one example where a variable is defined then used later. Were you talking about this ? Or can you clarify what “radius calculation” you hate ?
They’re referring (I believe) to the screenshot right at the top of the article, which includes this absurd calculation:
My guess (hope!) is that this is not ‘serious’ code, but padding for the sake of a screenshot to demonstrate that it’s possible to use each of these different features (not that you should!).
Oh I missed this. I think it’s only here to showcase doing math between different units, which is really nice in my opinion. I’m thinking about a few instances where I had to resort to dirty JS hacks just because CSS did not support this at the time
It‘s used in Facebooks css. Remembered it from a nice article from Ahmad Shadeed. And while this limbo sure has some usefulness, it‘s way too obscure to use for the fun of it.
To add to this: CSS really has come a long way. This border-radius example can be done with Container Queries by now, which has quite good support already.
Yeah CSS is now decent. The only problem is that the nesting is not very well supported yet. It’s something like only browsers > 2023 and let’s be realistic people run old machines.
Definitely not widely supported enough. Made the switch from sass back to css quite a while ago and let postcss polyfill less supported features like nesting.
Yeah, I was reading about PostCSS the other day, but still too lazy to change my environment. To be fair I only need the nesting polyfill and some kind of minifier, the rest I can live with native stuff.
Lightning CSS is also great. A minifier at its core but also includes transpiling for older browser
We still see somewhat old browsers, especially from people using Safari on Apple devices (because IIRC it only updates when you update the whole OS). But it’s a lot better than it used to be thanks to most browser having auto-updates
Yeah, exactly.
I’ve read interesting argumentation against nesting. I’m not confident in whether it’s more useful or not, in some situations or in general.
Trust me, you’ll code faster and your CSS will be way more readable.
Their machines might be old, but their browsers auto-update.
Until you find they’re using and old version of macOS… or Windows 8. 😂
I still reach for sass for a lot of things, but now you don’t have to, which is really nice
HTML tends to absorb all its best kludges. I put off learning JQuery for so long that the features I wanted became standard.
Good riddance, I say. Web dev is infested with layers upon layers of tools that attempt to abstract what is already fairly simple and straightforward to work with. We’re beyond the days of needing to build buttons out of small image fragments, and JS is (slowly) becoming more livable in its raw form. I welcome anything that keeps the toolchain as simple as possible.
At my company I start all new projects without a framework. I try to write things in templated backend frameworks with no javascript on the frontend. If I need javascript, I try to use web components, styled with modular css in the shadow dom.
However, this sometimes requires an absurd amount of build tool configuration with webpack in order to get static asset and typescript loading working just perfectly. I end up kind of just writing my own framework instead