On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:53 PM, C. Scott Ananian
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Ori Livneh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I personally think it'd be unfortunate for this current effort to
> collapse
> > over such considerations, but I'm obviously biased.
> >
>
> Oh, I certainly agree.  For my part, I'm satisfied that the
> LESS/Sass/stylus issues have been adequately thought through (maybe some of
> this can make it back into the RfC).  The
> http://leafo.net/lessphp/docs/#custom_functions stuff looks very
> promising,
> it probably should be explicitly mentioned in any "LESS for MW" docs we
> write.  I look forward to seeing the @import guidelines as well.
>  --scott


Heartily agree as well.  I alluded to this in my longer answer.  Basically
Stylus/SASS do seem to be slightly ahead of LESS but it's a vanishing
difference and meaningLESS over the long term.

> The biggest gains to be had from using a CSS
> preprocessor tend to come from the most
> basic features

This I think is a most astute point from Ori.  It's why I made the analogy
to Coco.  I don't and never will use any of the complicated crazy Coco
constructs.  But writing class LineNode extends TimeseriesNode instead of
all the JS boilerplate for classes and inheritance is good.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to