On 12/21/2015 01:04 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 17:37:11 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That's a large leap. I suggest using Ddoc instead of Sass compact CSS
files, see the existing instance at
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/blob/master/css/cssmenu.css.dd.
Why is there a $(COLON) macro in there? Is it because of the silly
section feature of ddoc? Why does it matter at the bottom of the file
but not in the rest of it?
Yeah, that was the reason. I don't remember the specifics.
Using text macros in CSS is something I support. Indeed, my css expander
does them too, but most of ddoc's other features I fear are wrong like
the colon thing, and it lacks stuff that is specifically useful in css
itself like nested selectors.
Yah, there's always pressure on using the more specialized tool against
the general one. I wouldn't sell ddoc for css as a product, but for what
we need here is perfectly appropriate.
The section-with-a-colon thing is something we should probably not do at
all when compiling .dd files. Keep it for code documentation only.
(BTW, your _=\n\n pattern is useless, it
changes nothing and should be removed.)
You must be right, either I was wrong all along or things have changed
since. Please submit a tested PR?
While I do like using css helper programs... here, I'd prefer to just
keep the file simple. Let's just write standard CSS, understanding that
it has a few warts, but then getting the benefit of a very easy to
understand file for anyone to look at, no need to build it, and the
possibility of using standard css tools on it.
Sounds reasonable.
CoffeeScript sounds like a nice thing to add and is from what I've
heard reasonably stable.
Please don't. Coffeescript has distinctly negative value to me,
including complicating the build process even more, and just being a
PITA to write.
Again, I'd prefer to keep the javascript files simple too, no processors
on them. It's not like we need that much of it on this site anyway.
Nice, too.
Andrei
