3 ms·
The language has more powerful functions available, or at least it did when I first compared them. I also find Compass, Bourbon and Susy to be great assets. T
by jwarren 13y ago
The language has more powerful functions available, or at least it did when I first compared them.
I also find Compass, Bourbon and Susy to be great assets.
The Chrome dev tools support is outstanding.
The biggest drawback is that there's no client side evaluation like less.js. This occasionally makes working with other people a bit tricky. I usually make a sandbox.css for them to fiddle with, and then incorporate their changes every so often.
- ceejayoz 13y ago> The biggest drawback is that there's no client side evaluation like less.js. I've seen less.js make its way into live sites enough times that this almost counts as a positive for Sass for me.
- program247365 13y agoFor designers, just including a JS file that does the compiling on the fly seems why LESS gets more love from that group. And also that Twitter Bootstrap uses it as default (although there are SASS ports of Bootstrap). For beginners/designers to the whole precompiling CSS scene, setting up Ruby for the SASS/Compass toolchain could possibly be daunting. Although there are nice GUI alternatives: http://mac.appstorm.net/roundups/internet-roundup/5-mac-apps-that-make-css-preprocessors-easier-to-use/ http://mac.appstorm.net/roundups/internet-roundup/5-mac-apps... However I agree with other comments that it seems there are more tools/frameworks built on SASS (with Compass), that make it more appealing to me.