5 ms·

Bootstrap's grid really is nice. I really prefer Bootstraps grid over something like Bourboun's Neat grid system[0] where I have to pollute my CSS with include

Bootstrap's grid really is nice. I really prefer Bootstraps grid over something like Bourboun's Neat grid system[0] where I have to pollute my CSS with include statements. I've also been looking into http://purecss.io/ http://purecss.io/ since it's grid is similar but the CSS package is lighter. [0] - http://neat.bourbon.io/ http://neat.bourbon.io/

dictum 12y ago
> I really prefer Bootstraps grid over something like Bourboun's Neat grid system[0] where I have to pollute my CSS with include statements. What about creating silent classes for the column sizes you use and `@extend`ing those classes? %three-columns { @include span-columns(3); } .sidebar { @extend %three-columns; } .menu { @extend %three-columns; background-color: #facade; }
- scarecrowbob 12y ago
  This is a good idea and one I have done a bit-- IMO, it is the best of both worlds, though I hadn't thought of using a silent class (did not know there were silent classes, in fact). Personally, if I am working quickly, I like having what amounts to a grid api exposed to my html and use it a lot, but I agree that it is better if it doesn't have to be baked into the markup.
  - greg5green 12y ago
    They are called placeholder selectors if you are looking for them in the Sass documentation.
snide 12y ago
Funny I think a lot of people would say the opposite. That they'd rather the grid code was in their CSS than in their HTML. Makes it much easier to change layouts if your grid code is defined in the CSS itself. Plus you get to manage them per screen-size however you want. To each their own.
owenversteeg 12y ago
If you like Pure you might like my framework Min. It's way smaller than Pure and v2 (released in a couple of days from now) will have full compatibility with Bootstrap. https://github.com/owenversteeg/min https://github.com/owenversteeg/min
- lowboy 12y ago
  I like Min but the 10-column grid seems like a poor choice vs 12-col, IMO. What was the rationale behind that?
  - owenversteeg 12y ago
    It was ridiculous, but back for Min 1.0 and 1.5 I couldn't fit in the extra ten or so bytes gzipped and minified. Back then, Min's priorities were "fit in as much stuff in 995 bytes and support IE5.5 as an intellectual exercise". They have since shifted to "make a CSS framework that can actually be used by other people, while still staying under 995 bytes". I also got another person (Scott O'Hara, https://github.com/scottaohara https://github.com/scottaohara) to contribute; he made several useful contributions and also made size optimizations. As a result, Min 2.0 will be 995 bytes and also include a (clearly superior) 12-column grid. It will also include many other useful features, like a better responsive navbar and better icons, include all of Bootstrap's features, and it will still support IE5.5+.

dictum 12y ago

> I really prefer Bootstraps grid over something like Bourboun's Neat grid system[0] where I have to pollute my CSS with include statements. What about creating silent classes for the column sizes you use and `@extend`ing those classes? %three-columns { @include span-columns(3); } .sidebar { @extend %three-columns; } .menu { @extend %three-columns; background-color: #facade; }

scarecrowbob 12y ago
This is a good idea and one I have done a bit-- IMO, it is the best of both worlds, though I hadn't thought of using a silent class (did not know there were silent classes, in fact). Personally, if I am working quickly, I like having what amounts to a grid api exposed to my html and use it a lot, but I agree that it is better if it doesn't have to be baked into the markup.
- greg5green 12y ago
  They are called placeholder selectors if you are looking for them in the Sass documentation.

snide 12y ago

Funny I think a lot of people would say the opposite. That they'd rather the grid code was in their CSS than in their HTML. Makes it much easier to change layouts if your grid code is defined in the CSS itself. Plus you get to manage them per screen-size however you want. To each their own.

owenversteeg 12y ago

If you like Pure you might like my framework Min. It's way smaller than Pure and v2 (released in a couple of days from now) will have full compatibility with Bootstrap. https://github.com/owenversteeg/min https://github.com/owenversteeg/min

lowboy 12y ago
I like Min but the 10-column grid seems like a poor choice vs 12-col, IMO. What was the rationale behind that?
- owenversteeg 12y ago
  It was ridiculous, but back for Min 1.0 and 1.5 I couldn't fit in the extra ten or so bytes gzipped and minified. Back then, Min's priorities were "fit in as much stuff in 995 bytes and support IE5.5 as an intellectual exercise". They have since shifted to "make a CSS framework that can actually be used by other people, while still staying under 995 bytes". I also got another person (Scott O'Hara, https://github.com/scottaohara https://github.com/scottaohara) to contribute; he made several useful contributions and also made size optimizations. As a result, Min 2.0 will be 995 bytes and also include a (clearly superior) 12-column grid. It will also include many other useful features, like a better responsive navbar and better icons, include all of Bootstrap's features, and it will still support IE5.5+.