Here's the blueprint grid, re-written using scss and taking advantage of all the language features that are planned in sass3:
https://gist.github.com/13b0e09fc6f29c9dffd3 You can compare this to the current version: http://github.com/chriseppstein/compass/blob/master/frameworks/blueprint/stylesheets/blueprint/_grid.sass Chris On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:10 AM, Aaron Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm all for this too. $ makes much more sense than !. Although to be > honest I'm much more excited about the prospect of removing the need > for =. > > I've been using the SCSS syntax a bit (which is great by the way - a > massive step in the right direction), but I do get irked by having to > format styles like: > > div {border = 1px "solid" !green;} > > If I'll soon be able to do: > > div {border: 1px solid $green;} > > ..then my major complain of SASS/SCSS will be dealt with. :) > > > > On Mar 7, 8:42 am, hunkybill <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am all for this. $ is common in not only PHP stew but also > > Javascript. ! is NOT!! > > > > Thanks > > > > On Mar 7, 12:43 am, Chris Eppstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Let's assume for a second that it didn't create parsing ambiguities. > > > > > Would you really prefer: > > > > > div > > > border: width solid blue > > > > > over: > > > > > div > > > border: $width solid blue > > > > > I think the latter is much more clear from a reader's perspective. > > > > > And without the prefix we could also do horrible things like this: > > > > > solid = dashed; > > > blue = #f00; > > > width = 1px; > > > div > > > border: width solid blue > > > > > which would emit: > > > > > div{ border: 1px dashed red; } > > > > > In a programming language, you're working with variables all the time. > They > > > are the most common thing you work with and so it makes sense that > you'd > > > optimize the syntax around them, but in sass you're building styles > first > > > and variables are secondary -- as such, I feel quite strongly they > should be > > > easily identifiable as special. > > > > > Anyways, Nathan has already finished coding all this up and it's on the > scss > > > branch. Thanks to everyone for your input. The use of ! as a variable > prefix > > > will be deprecated in sass 3. > > > > > chris > > > > > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Michael Narciso <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I'd prefer no prefix but would be content with $. > > > > > > Norman Clarke wrote: > > > > > > I strongly agree that $ will be better than !. As far as deprecations > go, > > > > perhaps you could go with first a warning for one release cycle, and > then > > > > leave it as a non-default configuration option for another release > cycle > > > > before eliminating it entirely. > > > > > > On Mar 6, 2010 9:13 PM, "Tobias Adam" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I always thought that the "!" prefix tends to be a bit ambiguous > > > > because of its common notion of a logical NOT. > > > > I mean that reading > > > > > > =column-base(!last = false) > > > > +float-left > > > > @if !last > > > > +last > > > > > > reads to a Java/Ruby/JavaScript/C/… programmer as "IF NOT LAST" which > > > > is exactly the opposite of its intended meaning. > > > > > > On the contraty, I think using a "$" prefix positively reminds > > > > programmers of other languages’ syntax, even if it’s PHP ;-) > > > > So I would prefer the method of deprecating the "!" notation and > > > > moving towards the "$" syntax. > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > Tobi > > > > > > On Mar 7, 12:43 am, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > We were originally planning to go... > > > > > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Gabriel Sobrinho < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I think variables should not contain a prefix (like in plain > ruby). $ > > > > looks > > > > > >... > > > > > >> [email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > <haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > >< > > > > haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > <haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > > > > > > >. > > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > >... > > > > > > [email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > <haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > >< > > > > haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > <haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > > > > > > >. > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > > > > You rec... > > > > > > -- > > > > 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]<haml%[email protected]> > . > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > > > > 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]<haml%[email protected]>< > haml%[email protected]<haml%[email protected]> > >. > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > -- > 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] <haml%[email protected]>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > -- 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.
