5 ms·
I think they chose "post-process" based on the following feature: Taking plain CSS as an input also means you can use Myth to post-process anyone else's CSS,
by kcorbitt 13y ago
I think they chose "post-process" based on the following feature:
Taking plain CSS as an input also means you can use Myth to post-process anyone else's CSS, adding the browser support you need, without having to re-write their code in a completely different syntax.
What distinguishes it from LESS or SASS or whatever is that the input has to be valid CSS, as well as the output. Their claim is that it makes your CSS act now like it will in the future once the version of the spec they're targeting has been fully adopted.
- lstamour 13y agoOr maybe they were thinking visual post-processing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_post-processing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_post-processing
- stormcrowsx 13y agoTo me they chose the wrong word, they are still preprocessing because current css engines don't accept future css. Therefore it must be preprocessed by Myth before its usable in the browser.
- ricardobeat 13y agoLESS, SASS and rework/stylus are all supersets of CSS, so they can too "post-process" anyone else's CSS.
- amitu 13y agoThat would be a noop with LESS/SASS unless the input CSS was not a "valid" CSS. This project will "enhance" "normal" CSS to take care of polyfill, which alone is a win. Take any CSS file you got, and it suddenly has all browser prefixes thanks to this tool. This is something LESS/SASS can not do.
- ricardobeat 13y agoStyl(us) can. My point is that calling it a 'post-processor' is a misnomer.