Forums

  • # May 19, 2013 at 11:04 am

    I tried building a site in SASS. It was neat, I guess. However, my workflow didn’t benefit at all, and I didn’t appreciate having to download all these separate applications just to make it work.

    I build sites the simplest way I know how—with a browser, a text editor, and an FTP client. That’s all I really need. Am I *really* missing something here?

    At the end of the day, I just don’t see any point in preprocessors. Sure, I’d use SASS if it didn’t have to be converted to CSS. But I’m not keen on jumping through tons of hoops just to supposedly “save time”.

    Anyone with me?

    # May 19, 2013 at 4:25 pm

    Just use whatever if you feel comfortable using. There’s too much of every one copying each other I feel in this industry. Just do what is right for you as long as you follow best practices the way that you get there needs to be right for you.

    It’s like everyone using Sublime Text, I personally hate it, just can’t get passed the sidebar opening images etc.

    I personally love SASS and Compass, just saves so much time. Nesting alone for me makes it worth using. Sprite sheets in compass are also great.

    # May 19, 2013 at 4:39 pm

    Nesting is nice but it quickly results in overqualified selectors (adding weight and unwanted specificity), keeping that in mind I still use it. I started using Sass only weeks ago but I started to like it, mostly because of variables (in combination with color functions of Compass, I can change one color to change the whole appearance of a site) and extending placeholder selectors. Those are easy to use without the risk of inefficient CSS. I use some other functions too, but with care.

    I’m fine with using Sass, but I was fine with writing plain CSS too. So use whatever works for you ;)

    # May 19, 2013 at 6:24 pm

    > mostly because of variables (in combination with color functions of Compass, I can change one color to change the whole appearance of a site) and extending placeholder selectors. @CrocoDillon

    Exactly why I started using SCSS.

    # May 19, 2013 at 11:51 pm

    I couldn’t imagine going back to just CSS. I don’t have time to reply to this right now, but hopefully I can remember tomorrow!

    # May 20, 2013 at 2:28 am

    I also wanted to say that I wish SCSS/SASS would become a standard. When you can dynamically write code that effects simplicity and performance, that’s a game changer.

    Personally, there’s nothing more that I hate than writing CSS (and HTML). This makes it more interesting and fun.

    # May 20, 2013 at 3:34 am

    There are loads of benefits to using Sass even if you don’t make use of all of them it’s still worth using IMO. If you use an app like Codekit or Hammer it makes it really easy to set up and use too.

    I also like how you can split up your files it makes organising CSS much easier and codekit can then just minify it all down into one file.

    Can’t really see why you wouldn’t use it really. Sure everything it does you can do the old / long handed way but why make life harder than it needs to be.

    It also makes writing css3 easier dealing with the vendor prefixes.

    [This video first sold me](http://vimeo.com/24278115)

    # May 22, 2013 at 1:26 pm

    I try to make my points about WHY preprocessors in a recent talk: https://vimeo.com/66043740

    # May 22, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    I think even if you use SASS in it’s most simple form (variables, nesting etc) then it should still speed up your workflow. I’m not sure how it would slow you down – an app runs in the background and compiles the SCSS in to CSS almost instantly, most of these apps also have live browser reload which is way more convenient than having to refresh your browser every time.

    # May 22, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    @JoshWhite well for any personal stuff, I don’t see a good reason not to use it. As for the longevity, it’s a tool, you can’t wait around to see IF something else will come out. Even if when it does, you can then make the switch and any new project will be done with this new imaginary tool.

    As for using SASS/Less in team environment, your whole team needs to make the switch (at least the people working on any particular project that uses preprocessing). Using Version Control easily fixes the issue with multiple people working on same files.

    I found the talk by Nicole Sullivan to be more valuable than the one Chris did. http://vimeo.com/66039168

    # May 22, 2013 at 10:11 pm

    <--- This guy still doesn't use a preprocessor.. I don't know, i just find the need for one (personally speaking). Many people bring up good points about it, i just rather not use it.

    # May 22, 2013 at 10:17 pm

    > i just rather not use it

    Out of curiosity, can you expend little… why?

    IMO, just using preprocessing for nesting is beneficial.

    # May 22, 2013 at 11:51 pm

    Preprocessors are for newbs who aren’t good at CSS, plain and simple.

    1) Compass (for SASS) is a joke, how can you possibly learn bad ass CSS3 stuff if Compass is always taking care of the mountainous task of vendor prefixing.

    For example, this is just ridiculous looking.

    @include rotate(-45deg);

    What the hell is that doing?

    If you would just use CSS, it is 10x more clear what is going on and so much easier to write the full thing out. After all, half of being a good front-end dev is really nailing down copy and paste keyboard shortcuts.

    -webkit-transform: rotate(-45deg);
    -moz-transform: rotate(-45deg);
    -ms-transform: rotate(-45deg);
    -o-transform: rotate(-45deg);
    transform: rotate(-45deg);

    The more repetitive the CSS, the more opportunities you have a chance to memorize it, amirite?

    2) Ok, people keep touting working in a “modular way” by using imports and breaking your CSS up into manageable chunks. If CSS was meant to be like this, we wouldn’t minify it back to one single file, duh. CSS naturally likes to be in a big clump. Plus scanning giant CSS files is super easy once you memorize the structure of the document and where everything resides, as a bonus, this is also job security.

    3) Auto creating sprites? Sounds like someone should take a a remedial math class and create sprites like a man. There is nothing like the satisfaction of having to look at that previous sprite you created on another project to remember the format of how to set them up.

    4) Extends, Silent Classes & Includes are all just crutches for people who don’t have a grasp on CSS. Preprocessors are a trend that will fade soon, I am pretty sure things like SublimeText will die out also. Real men just use the OG Notepad, not the ++ version (which is just another crutch).

    I think the points above illustrate why Preprocessors are lame, but even worse, the people who use them probably listen to Nickleback.

    # May 23, 2013 at 12:09 am

    > Preprocessors are for newbs who aren’t good at CSS, plain and simple.

    This statement invalidates everything that follows it. @scottnix

    I agree that any programing language must be learned well before adding another abstraction layer. As a professional who has good grasp on many features of CSS, one should IMO consider preprocessing…after all it’s just a tool, and if it helps… all the better.

    Also, nobody is forcing you to use it. (unless it’s a job requirement)

    The whole idea behind preprocessing CSS was developed by people who are proficient in writing plain CSS and were looking for ways to make life easier. (80/20)

    # May 23, 2013 at 12:44 am

    > Preprocessors are for newbs who aren’t good at CSS, plain and simple.

    Plain and simply: wrong.

    I guess I’m a newb? @chriscoyier is a newb? Paul Irish is a newb?

    > The more repetitive the CSS, the more opportunities you have a chance to memorize it, amirite?

    Yes… when you’re learning. Why the hell should I have to write out all of the prefixes if I already know they should be there?

    > If CSS was meant to be like this, we wouldn’t minify it back to one single file, duh.

    I guess you also don’t minify any of your JS files?

    > Plus scanning giant CSS files is super easy once you memorize the structure of the document and where everything resides, as a bonus, this is also job security.

    This is ridiculous. Your argument against a modular set up is that you can easily *memorize* a massive CSS file. The whole point of a modular set up is to avoid that and to make things easier for you. Why should I have to scan a massive file to find sidebar stuff when I can just create sidebar.scss?

    > Auto creating sprites? Sounds like someone should take a a remedial math class and create sprites like a man.

    I’ve never used it myself. Instead, I’ve built a custom mixin that makes it easier to read and to automatically support retina displays. All I have to do is write `@include sprite(x,y)` (where x and y aren’t pixel values, instead they are they location in a structured grid sprite that I’ve created).

    > Extends, Silent Classes & Includes are all just crutches for people who don’t have a grasp on CSS.

    I have a complete grasp of CSS. It sounds like you have a problem with people taking shortcuts and not learning something properly.

    > I think the points above illustrate why Preprocessors are lame, but even worse, the people who use them probably listen to Nickleback.

    Either this is an amazing troll or you have a lot to learn in this industry. Not understanding preprocessors is one thing, but refusing to use them would make sure you wouldn’t get hired by my employer.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 30 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

icon-anchoricon-closeicon-emailicon-linkicon-logo-staricon-menuicon-nav-guideicon-searchicon-staricon-tag