![]() This approach feels really clean, logical and efficient to me, and it's been the biggest change in my workflow in several years I'd say (probably since moving from WYSIWYG editors to Notepad++). a style problem with the nav is going to be in navigation.less a style in the footer will be in footer.less, etc). Couple that with numerous LESS files for each element of the site (compiled together using the above How-to) and you get nice separation of code, which makes my life a lot easier when building a complex site (e.g. ![]() I combine it with the HOWTO here () on minifying and gzipping the files, and what's served up is a lovely block of CSS which is about as small as it's possible to get (assuming your styles are efficient, of course). For me the simple ability to inherit styles allows for much more logical layout of LESS files, which makes revisiting styles later on to tweak or change something a lot less of a headache - you can immediately see the logic of the styles and work out what it is you need to change. When I first tried LESS a few months ago I was really impressed, and I still use it on every new project now. I second your feeling about the 'me-too' thing going round at the moment. I do feel touched on a very good point, with a lot of Frameworks, Boilerplates, Libraries, coming out on a more or less weekly basis, I do get an ever increasing sense of there being a "Me too" attitude in web development at present, its getting increasingly difficult to sort the wheat from the chaf, some of these things are just surplus to requirement, LESS was one of the things that kept catching my eye, which is why I wanted to get some feedback, if I'm going to spend some time learning new syntax, I need to be sure it will save me some time down the road, will definitely give it a try. and a lot of the concepts are watertight, while some I feel may become detrimental, I wouldnt lose sleep if to make life easier I re-declared a few lines of code, or added some float declarations to a container etc, and from what I gather it lacks the dynamic nature of LESS and SASS, no variable declarations and stuff like that, so for me personally dont think it would be worth pursuing. I did take a look at oocss when it first came out, I saw a vid of Nicole Sullivan talking about her work with Facebook, IMHO in just looked like some good practice guidelines to me, I was always under the impression that CSS should be used in this way, tearing away universal chunks of code away and storing them in their own class for re-use, to me, was what CSS was all about, keeping things small and agile to use again later, like said I am not dismissing it, it was some time ago I looked into it. I will let you know how I get on, going to download and have a play this week. John VidalThemes replied on at 3:33 am Reply But LESS in combination with CodeKit is wicked. You can even have it compress/minify it for you so your CSS loads faster. ![]() It can be setup so that each time you save a LESS file, Codekit automatically processes it into CSS for you. Codekit understands LESS (and SASS and Stylis and Javascript and Coffeescript). ![]() In getting started with LESS, I found Codekit (). )īut, actually, the thing that has been the biggest help (for me) ISN'T specifically about LESS. Nesting selectors like that just works well with the way my brain works, I guess. the nature of LESS's structure DOES make my CSS files easier to read/understand (for me, anyway). when/if we can finally just use the standard code to define this, I'll only need to edit one spot. AND being able to pass in different sizes for the radius in each instance IS pretty handy! Plus. creating mixins for things like the CSS3 stack of browser-specific code needed for creating rounded corners (or gradients) DOES save time. being able to define and use variables for things like a site's primary & secondary colors. But it does lots of little things that, together, do make coding a bit easier (and, dare I say, more fun?!). Has it solved some big, overarching problem I was having with CSS? No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |