Spyke
lemmy.world

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.

26
pinchyreply
lemmy.world

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.

8
TCB13reply
lemmy.world

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.

0
pcouyreply

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

5
Kissakireply
programming.dev

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.

1

Trust me, you'll code faster and your CSS will be way more readable.

1
CgH10N4Co2reply
lemmy.cafe

Their machines might be old, but their browsers auto-update.

1

Until you find they’re using and old version of macOS… or Windows 8. 😂

0
lemmy.ml

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?

22
unmagicalreply
lemmy.ml

Cool. Help me learn then by answering my questions.

3
tapdattlreply
lemmy.world

He did

[...] 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

AKA you gain nothing.

19

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!"

23
pcouyreply
lemmy.pierre-couy.fr

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 ?

3
lucasreply
startrek.website

They're referring (I believe) to the screenshot right at the top of the article, which includes this absurd calculation:

border-radius: max (0px, min(8px, calc( (100vw - 4px - 100%) * 9999)) );

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!).

5

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.

3

border-radius: max(0px, min(8px, calc( (100vw - 4px - 100%) * 9999)) );

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

2

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.

9

I still reach for sass for a lot of things, but now you don't have to, which is really nice

8

You reached the end

Goodbye SASS, welcome back native CSS | Spyke