On Monday, 21 April 2014 at 20:12:31 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:
On 4/21/14, 12:38 PM, Aleksandar Ruzicic wrote:
I'm not sure if it is smart to use simple text macro
processing system
as a replacement for full-featured DSL such is Sass. And I
don't think
that some features available (and really useful!) in Sass are
even
possible with Ddoc. For example branching with @if, composing
of various
style sets to optimal CSS (Sass has @extend directive for
this).
Also, Ddoc can't minify resulting CSS which is something that
is
considered good practice (serve gzipped minified JS/CSS), so
some
external tool must be used for that. With node-sass we can get
all that
and more (i.e. source maps)..
A little searching turned up libsass.org which apparently is
the native library that node.js uses for its implementation. So
if there's an objection to full node.js (or if vibe.d is used)
then perhaps the native library would do.
Oh, I forgot to mention that I'm not advocating the use of
node.js to serve dlang.org (I'm all for vibe.d route!), just to
use node.js packages I'm used to (i.e. gulp[1], gulp-sass[2] and
gulp-browserify[3]) that ease me in working with front-end
projects.
[1] https://www.npmjs.org/package/gulp
[2] https://www.npmjs.org/package/gulp-sass
[3] https://www.npmjs.org/package/gulp-browserify
