4 ms·

I will be "this guy", but let me rant here. First of all, the article is 3 years old, and though he says basically truth, it is noticeable only on slow machines

by bloomca 10y ago

I will be "this guy", but let me rant here. First of all, the article is 3 years old, and though he says basically truth, it is noticeable only on slow machines with a massive amount of content. Initially I was against using flexbox for page layout (for components, of course, it is the best), but after trying in real (big) applications it turned out to work perfectly. And after three years of browsers improving, this advice looks like a nonsense. And secondly, I would like to blame these google developer advocates, which don't make sense for building applications. For instance, here they say one technology is bad, and they offer you to use another technology, which even now is still under implementation (and it is 3 years ago!), which looks absolutely ridiculous – literally the worst piece of advice you can give to someone who tries to build real software product. And it is not only this article, it is also a thing for a lot of other articles and their talks – like advice to stop using frameworks for mobile applications (I know, it is possible to get rid of JS completely and speed up your app by 500%, but there are a lot of metrics, and also nobody wants to write two separate versions), or promoting of "platform" (Polymer) against of framework. While it might work just fine for small projects, with big project you will end up writing your own routing, event system, utilities, validations, filtering, etc. Also it is even more funny considering that they are backing Angular, which is a pretty bloated framework.

divanvisagie 10y ago
I honestly think this is just someone who dug up a 3 year old article because they are upset about flexbox in bootstrap 4.
- ChristianBundy 10y ago
  Exactly. Their comment below: > I was hoping people would come with more examples of things not to use flexbox for with well-reasoned arguments. I had an experience a few months ago where someone had used flexbox to vertically separate sections that could have various sizes of content that needed to have varying spacing between the content and I really felt as good as I thought the developer was Flexbox was wrong and just could not get past 80% to real completion of the design.
jaffathecake 10y ago
Like you say, the article is demonstrably true, and yes it depends on the situations clarified in the article. My intent here is we shouldn't abandon the work on grid because flexbox is "job done". Unfortunately, yes, work on grid was slow. Makes me giggle to see you suggest I back Angular, when I often get the Angular team saying I complain about them too much. Where have you seen me backing Angular btw?

by bloomca 10y ago

divanvisagie 10y ago

I honestly think this is just someone who dug up a 3 year old article because they are upset about flexbox in bootstrap 4.

ChristianBundy 10y ago
Exactly. Their comment below: > I was hoping people would come with more examples of things not to use flexbox for with well-reasoned arguments. I had an experience a few months ago where someone had used flexbox to vertically separate sections that could have various sizes of content that needed to have varying spacing between the content and I really felt as good as I thought the developer was Flexbox was wrong and just could not get past 80% to real completion of the design.

jaffathecake 10y ago

Like you say, the article is demonstrably true, and yes it depends on the situations clarified in the article. My intent here is we shouldn't abandon the work on grid because flexbox is "job done". Unfortunately, yes, work on grid was slow. Makes me giggle to see you suggest I back Angular, when I often get the Angular team saying I complain about them too much. Where have you seen me backing Angular btw?