3 ms·
I'm a bit confused about the constant mention of option 3 in this article, because it seems to match none of the actual options from the original poll. The orig
by jorams 4y ago
I'm a bit confused about the constant mention of option 3 in this article, because it seems to match none of the actual options from the original poll. The original poll offered three options:
Option 1: @nest. Requires either starting a nested selector with &, or prefixing it with @nest if the & should not be at the start.
Option 2: @nest restricted. Always requires starting with @nest.
Option 3: Additional brackets to group nested selectors.
The "option 3" mentioned in this article matches none of those. It's like option 3 without the defining characteristic of the brackets, or option 1 without the required nesting indicator (but now with the restriction that the selector needs to start with a symbol).
None of these options are particularly great. The new "option 3" looks cleanest, but the symbol requirement is going to trip people up.
- culi 4y ago> Additional brackets to group nested selectors. Isn't this what Sass does? Option 3 seems to me to be exactly Sass nesting except the "&" is required in more places than it is in Sass. I personally love the "&" and already write my Sass that way anytime I nest
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]