![]() One of these days I'm definitely going to try LESS on a "large-scale" site just to get a better view whether or not it's really worth it - until then the rant above pretty much summarizes how I feelīy the way: have you guys already seen the W3C draft for CSS Variables? It's not the same thing as these frameworks mentioned here, but it is a small step to the same direction. This is an interesting subject both in technological and theoretical sense and those always tend to get me on my toes. Sorry for the rant and sorry for getting sidetracked. ![]() LESS/SASS/SCSS/whatever are definitely an improvement over plain old CSS, too bad they're not natively supported by browsers but require various tricks and gimmicks to run smoothly. Is it really THAT difficult to keep pure CSS files up to date? In my experience the answer is "very rarely" and I'm saying this even though I've worked with some seriously bloated relatively big stylesheets before. I do know that LESS can be compiled server-side with the help of Node and now that the PHP version was mentioned (thanks Marty!) I'm likely going to check that one out too, although the final deployment process still requires some thought.Īnyway, I'm sad to say this but all the hassle has already made me somewhat cynical about whether we really even need the added complexity and overhead compared to plain old CSS. The main reason why I haven't used LESS (or SASS/SCSS) in customer projects is that we have multiple people working on same projects, sometimes at the same time, so 1) compiling locally and just uploading a compiled CSS file isn't really an option (I'm not even considering letting JS handle compiling on a production site) and 2) I can't just jump in the LESS/SASS/SCSS bandwagon by myself without discussing it properly with others or I might have some serious explaining to do later on. Not the best way to choose your tools, but that's still how it often goes. It really makes a lot of things much easier and less time-consuming.įirst of all, when I first started to get into LESS and SASS, I found LESS documentation more "newbie-friendly" - or perhaps just "friendly" in general - and that's a big part of why I was instantly drawn into it instead of SASS. I feel it has simplified my workflow massively, but like everybody else, I was sceptical at first, but now I can only recommend giving it a try. Personally, I wouldn't want to go back to writing plain CSS, but that's another option, of course. My workflow probably wouldn't change much if I had to use LESS or Stylus from now on. I prefer to write my own mixins and only use Compass for the complicated stuff and for CSS3 features which are still subject to change. Sass has the Compass library, which I use, but not extensively. ![]() Stylus has a much more concise syntax, which might be the reason I'll check it out one day. ![]() Setting up Ruby is very easy, so my choice of using Sass was not at all related to the actual features of the preprocessor.Īs far as I have looked at other preprocessors, it doesn't really make a big difference anyway. I have yet to manage setting up a local nodejs server on my Ubuntu machine. Funny thing: I use Sass/SCSS because (for me) it's less hassle to use over LESS or Stylus. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |