3 ms·
OTOH, without LESS a lot of us would have to add Ruby to our stack :p
by mattwad 12y ago
OTOH, without LESS a lot of us would have to add Ruby to our stack :p
- hackerboos 12y agohttps://github.com/sass/node-sass https://github.com/sass/node-sass
- eddiegroves 12y agoDoes libsass work 100% with the Bootstrap sass port? Every time I've checked on libsass support it is behind the ruby version in some way.
- e1g 12y agoYes - we use libsass across the board, including building BS3, and have had no issues with compatibility. It used to have a problem with high precision numeric values (like "6.666666666%" in BS) but that's has been resolved.
- illicium 12y ago> The libsass library is not currently at feature parity with the 3.2 Ruby Gem that most Sass users will use, and has little-to-no support for 3.3 syntax.
- harlanlewis 12y agoLibsass is missing some hugely important features, but it (appears to be) in very active development and the disparity list is shrinking. Even lacking missing those features, the 12x compilation speed improvement in libsass is pretty compelling.
- e1g 12y agoThe note is slightly outdated - the recently released libsass V3[1] is targeting SASS 3.4, and they expect to fully pass the spec by V3.1
- STRML 12y agoThat said, it is mostly good enough. I've used it for a few SASS projects in combination with Bourbon and it works great. IMO the huge compilation speedup (I saw reductions from 5-6s to about 200ms) was worth the slight move backwards in features. I became much more productive with a more responsive livereload.
- raziel2p 12y agoI use SassC: https://github.com/sass/sassc https://github.com/sass/sassc - a basic SASS/SCSS compiler written purely in C. It's not 100% up-to-date with the ruby version and you miss out on the more advanced features like custom functions, but it's blazing fast and I've never really needed more than the basic features anyway.
- acjohnson55 12y agoMy problem there is that Susy Grid requires bleeding-edge SASS. And the very latest Compass version, too.