3 ms·
I don't know. As a fan of CSS I don't really "get" Less.js ... Sure I understand the benefit of defining certain properties, but are the benefits good enough to
by benbeltran 16y ago
I don't know. As a fan of CSS I don't really "get" Less.js ... Sure I understand the benefit of defining certain properties, but are the benefits good enough to warrant depending on an additional javascript library for something like this? What happens if people block javascript?
I don't know. It's not bad, but it's not for me. But going as fas as to say it will obsolete CSS, that's just too much.
- nailer 16y ago> are the benefits good enough to warrant depending on an additional javascript library for something like this? What happens if people block javascript? Nothing, in production you'd use the compiled ver. The article should make this clearer though.
- edanm 16y agoThat depends. The "new" version they talk about in the article does require Javascript, since it does on-the-fly compiling. For the current version you're right.
- nailer 16y agoI understand the thing they just released allows on-the-fly compiling. I'm just suggesting is that since the existing options remain available, you can still use them.
- rimantas 16y agoThe early implementation of CSS in Netscape relied on Javascript. That was no fun.