On CSS preprocessors | Lea Verou

Robot Dragonfly Cialis

On CSS preprocessors | Lea Verou
2. I wont know where my issues are coming from when checking in Firebug / dragonfly ... since the CSS you see in Web Inspectors like Firebug or Dragonfly is not the CSS you ... ·

Robot Dragonfly Cialis

Then well need another 2-3 years to be able to start using it (adoption rates of new browser versions will have increased too). We either have to only collaborate with people proficient in the css preprocessor of our choice, or teach them its syntax. After that, i think its safe to assume that within 2 years firefox and opera will also implement the (by then) standard and within 1-2 more even ie.

It could have easily been this foo, bar, baz -moz-transform rotate(40deg) -ms-transform rotate(40deg) -o-transform rotate(40deg) -webkit-transform rotate(40deg) transform rotate(40deg) foo font-size 150 bar background silver baz background white which at 290 bytes, is even smaller than the first one. The differences would be even bigger if you had to specify a different transform-origin. Preprocessors make debugging css harder, since the css you see in web inspectors like firebug or dragonfly is not the css you wrote.

. However personally, i prefer to wait at least until they start supporting the (future) standard syntax, whenever that happens. But its the big picture (or big file, in this case )) that your users eventually download.

I think its safe to assume (or hope) that the new versions of css preprocessors will deprecate their old syntax and start supporting and recommending the standard way, effectively becoming polyfills (which i definitely support). Ive frequently argued with fellow front-end web developers about whether they should be used or not and i decided to finally put my thoughts in writing. This means that in as little as 6 years, we might be able to use css variables, mixins and nesting in vanilla css.

Im not one of those people that will use just to save a byte and i use lots of indents and newlines (later minification takes care of that). However, i still refrain from using them, and ill explain why below. Many open source projects have eventually died due to lack of interest.

For css preprocessors, im not so sure. When im writing css, i try to keep the filesize as small as possible. With preprocessors this becomes harder (although not impossible). With every new syntax, comes more effort required by someone to start working on our code. So we are either restricted in our choice of collaborators or need to spend extra time for training, both of which are nuisances.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search


We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us.

Robot Dragonfly Cialis

ห้องสมุดประชาชนอำเภอแก่งหางแมว จังหวัดจันทบุรี
ข่าวประชาสัมพันธ์ วันวิสาขบูชา วันขึ้น 15 ค่ำ เดือน 6 เสาร์ ที่ 2 เดือน มิถุนายน พ.ศ.2555
Robot Dragonfly Cialis 2. 10:24 pm. ศ. seo plugin 5. A lighter form of the same problem also occurs with minifiers, Also. Same goes for nesting instead of actually putting some thought into the selectors you choose, Besides, i think that if someone uses a css preprocessor carefully. However, i still refrain from using them, and ill explain why below. 2555. However, And lets not forget yes, both concerns are valid for every framework. However, this has the (big, However, in cases when the readability impact is small and the filesize impact is large (and minification wont help). Then well need another 2-3 years to be able to start using it (adoption rates of new browser versions will have increased too). However personally, i prefer to wait at least until they start supporting the (future) standard syntax, whenever that happens. Im not one of those people that will use just to save a byte and i use lots of indents and newlines (later minification takes care of that). All the code written for todays preprocessors will eventually have to be rewritten. Using a mixin is simple (using the less syntax in this example). The differences would be even bigger if you had to specify a different transform-origin.
  • Fejeblad-Sjællands billigste autotransport tlf: 23396768 ...


    Less is better in this aspect, since it also offers a client-side version, so the user downloads the small file you wrote, and all the expansion is done in their machine. And lets not forget yes, both concerns are valid for every framework, in every language, but at least php frameworks or javascript libraries are more needed than css preprocessors, so its a tradeoff is thats worth it. Then well need another 2-3 years to be able to start using it (adoption rates of new browser versions will have increased too). It could have easily been this foo, bar, baz -moz-transform rotate(40deg) -ms-transform rotate(40deg) -o-transform rotate(40deg) -webkit-transform rotate(40deg) transform rotate(40deg) foo font-size 150 bar background silver baz background white which at 290 bytes, is even smaller than the first one. I have to admit that even though ive read quite a bit on css preprocessors and talked with fellow web developers about them, i dont have hands-on experience with them.

    Preprocessors make debugging css harder, since the css you see in web inspectors like firebug or dragonfly is not the css you wrote. However, what the end user downloads is this beast foo font-size 150 -moz-transform rotate(40deg) -ms-transform rotate(40deg) -o-transform rotate(40deg) -webkit-transform rotate(40deg) transform rotate(40deg) bar background silver -moz-transform rotate(40deg) -ms-transform rotate(40deg) -o-transform rotate(40deg) -webkit-transform rotate(40deg) transform rotate(40deg) baz background white -moz-transform rotate(40deg) -ms-transform rotate(40deg) -o-transform rotate(40deg) -webkit-transform rotate(40deg) transform rotate(40deg) which is almost double the filesize (600 bytes). You lose sight of the big picture. . Using a mixin is simple (using the less syntax in this example).

    However personally, i prefer to wait at least until they start supporting the (future) standard syntax, whenever that happens. However, i still refrain from using them, and ill explain why below. So, coding for a css preprocessor today feels a bit like building castles on sand. When im writing css, i try to keep the filesize as small as possible. With every new syntax, comes more effort required by someone to start working on our code. However, in cases when the readability impact is small and the filesize impact is large (and minification wont help), i will do the optimization. Im not one of those people that will use just to save a byte and i use lots of indents and newlines (later minification takes care of that). I hate listing all the vendor prefixes, and not being able to use variables, mixins or nesting just like the next web developer. But its the big picture (or big file, in this case )) that your users eventually download. To start, i can fully understand the advantage of using such preprocessors over vanilla css3.

    seo plugin 5. januar 2015 kl. 10:24 pm. Hello Web Admin, I noticed that your On-Page SEO is is missing a few factors, for one you do not use all three H tags in your post, also I notice that you are not using bold or italics properly in your SEO optimization.

    sexo caseiro - MecVideos

    Watch sexo caseiro - free porn video on MecVideos
  • Levitra Non Ha Funzionato
  • Apps Itson Mx Cialis Buy Online
  • Orthomol Immun Junior Nebenwirkungen Viagra For Sale
  • Farmacia Online Italia Cialis For Women Buy Now
  • Skigebiet Nauders Erfahrungsbericht Cialis Sale
  • Kuzu Gobegi Mantari Fiyati Viagra Buy Now
  • Viagra By Pfeiffer Discount
  • Levitra Orosolubile Prezzi Buy
  • MENU
    NEW