What I was suggesting was automatically removing any properties that had empty values.
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:56 PM, joneff <[email protected]> wrote: > > Firstly, yes, I could keep it in one line, but I do it on several for > the sake of readability (for other people in my company). > > On the other thing -- indeed, empty values have no meaning in CSS, but > they do add weight in the file size. And I wouldn't like to have a > file or files with empty values. > > That's the reason for coming up with the +property? mixin in the first > place. > > But since I have some user generated parameters, I later extended the > mixin and check for "none", "transparent" etc, since I didn't want > those to be duplicated. > > As a result I did reduce the final file size footprint by some 30 or > 40 %, if the user has not done any of the available customizations or > has explicitly set values like "transparent", "inherit" etc. > > I am not saying this is a "must have" feature -- I had an interesting > situation and solved it, I thought I'd share ;) In the worst possible > case, I get code refactoring and in any other ideas how to make my > snippet even better. > > I would attach a real life examples, but I did a bit of shortening in > my styles -- I now use 4 or 5 character mixins with up to 5 parameters > for the better part of the rules. So the my files are not exactly > readable and strait forward. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
