3 ms·

> Regeneration is a problem when you have lots of developer workstations, build agents and test machines to deploy the Sass stack to. If you can't make somethi

> Regeneration is a problem when you have lots of developer workstations, build agents and test machines to deploy the Sass stack to. If you can't make something like sass work with your version control, it's a problem with your workforce or workflow, not the technology. It is trivial to set up a ruby command line on any OS and then have a .gemfile in your version control to ensure that everyone is using the same version of sass. Then all that is required to generate the css files from the sass sources is opening up a command prompt with ruby and typing `compass watch`. It's worth it for the time saved writing css. > Nope but it's a real problem. Some of our guys don't do the web. Is it not also a problem that you have people writing your css who "don't do the web"? That seems like the bigger issue here to me.

csmuk 13y ago
It becomes less trivial when you have 100 computers to throw it on at once before it works. If you read my comments carefully, you will see this is a merge time issue. Many different people do merges. Some reintegration merges will be performed by people who don't do web stuff. There may be trivial web changes on a feature branch but people have absolutely no idea about Sass or associated tooling. They can cope with css fine. Our product has about 5000 lines of css and about 3 million lines of other languages. Web is a tiny part of our applications.
- the_hangman 13y ago
  I did read your comments, and I still think that you're making sass out to be entirely more complicated than it has to be. It's somewhat clear from your comments that you never gave css preprocessors a fair shake. There is no 'associated tooling' with sass. It's just a preprocessor. It doesn't need to integrate with your IDE (doing so would be somewhat pointless, IMO). You just invoke it from the CL and let it do it's thing. It really couldn't be any easier. All of your problems are actually easily solvable, but it'd be rather pointless to use sass on a project that only has 5000 lines of css anyways. About as pointless as commenting on a thread about a technology you don't really understand to say that you "refuse to use" it, then trying to prove everyone wrong for pointing out that your issues with it are actually either not actually issues with the technology or have trivial solutions (i.e. you're not the first person to run into these issues).
  - masklinn 13y ago
    > It doesn't need to integrate with your IDE (doing so would be somewhat pointless, IMO). It's somewhat neat, actually. Not necessary by a long shot but 1. there's a chance the IDE understands the precompiled languages (and offers syntax checks, autocompletion, etc...) and 2. you don't need to run the compiler/watcher because the IDE takes care of that when you or it saves, as part of its normal "stuff to do when saving".

csmuk 13y ago

It becomes less trivial when you have 100 computers to throw it on at once before it works. If you read my comments carefully, you will see this is a merge time issue. Many different people do merges. Some reintegration merges will be performed by people who don't do web stuff. There may be trivial web changes on a feature branch but people have absolutely no idea about Sass or associated tooling. They can cope with css fine. Our product has about 5000 lines of css and about 3 million lines of other languages. Web is a tiny part of our applications.

the_hangman 13y ago
I did read your comments, and I still think that you're making sass out to be entirely more complicated than it has to be. It's somewhat clear from your comments that you never gave css preprocessors a fair shake. There is no 'associated tooling' with sass. It's just a preprocessor. It doesn't need to integrate with your IDE (doing so would be somewhat pointless, IMO). You just invoke it from the CL and let it do it's thing. It really couldn't be any easier. All of your problems are actually easily solvable, but it'd be rather pointless to use sass on a project that only has 5000 lines of css anyways. About as pointless as commenting on a thread about a technology you don't really understand to say that you "refuse to use" it, then trying to prove everyone wrong for pointing out that your issues with it are actually either not actually issues with the technology or have trivial solutions (i.e. you're not the first person to run into these issues).
- masklinn 13y ago
  > It doesn't need to integrate with your IDE (doing so would be somewhat pointless, IMO). It's somewhat neat, actually. Not necessary by a long shot but 1. there's a chance the IDE understands the precompiled languages (and offers syntax checks, autocompletion, etc...) and 2. you don't need to run the compiler/watcher because the IDE takes care of that when you or it saves, as part of its normal "stuff to do when saving".