Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bootstrap 4 alpha

blog.getbootstrap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 216 posts

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#161

Post by rattray »

o_____________o wrote: post #9

They seem pretty confident about Sass; It seems outdated and clunky to me, in part because it's always going to be the only Ruby dependency in any of my projects. The Javascript parser never found parity from what I know. By contrast, PostCSS is faster and has massive adoption. Seems like the way forward. Anybody think this is wrong? > PostCSS can do the same work as preprocessors like Sass, Less, and Stylus. But Pos…

@mdo recently tweeted that v5 will likely be in PostCSS:

> Oh, btw—Bootstrap 4 will be in SCSS. And if you care, v5 will likely be in PostCSS because holy crap that sounds cool.

https://twitter.com/mdo/status/591364406816079873

EDIT: also, elsewhere on this thread, he mentioned:

> Sass is really similar to Less, so it's an easier transition to make than jumping right to PostCSS.

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#162

Post by jamesdelaneyie »

bluetidepro wrote: post #22

One amazing thing to note is that in v3.3.5 (last stable) bootstrap.min.css was at ~123kb. The new 4.0.0 alpha bootstrap.min.css is at ~88kb. WOW. That's just amazing. Congrats to everyone who worked on this project. I'm always so impressed with the work done on it! Also, I want to add, I don't care where you land on the side of the debate whether to use Bootstrap or not, there is some very smart minds behind the pro…

I used to hate the whole shave kb off a file stuff (its 2015! we'll have superdooper speeds in 5 years!) until someone added up the hardware usage overall worldwide and it made a bit more sense. it made more sense when the crash bandicoot guys had that story about fitting the entire source code onto that cd with 4kb* left.

* or thereabouts

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#163

Post by e12e »

lotyrin wrote: post #132
xrstf wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I really love how I now not only need Node and npm, but also gcc to install/build a frickin' web project. Because f*ck the platform-independence we got with Node, who cares if a simple `npm install` takes 30 minutes to complete.

I can't help but feel like the anti-native-extensions point of view is short sighted. Why shouldn't we have optimized implementations of algorithms that we can share across various languages?

I generally agree with you sentiment -- but with js being within an order of magnitude of C -- it seems the likelihood of incompatibilities between the js version (that could run in rhino, nodejs and the browser for in-place use of sass over css) outweigh the benefits of maintaining a C version (especially as specifications evolve, and need to be ported to C).

Then again, having (at least) two implementations is one way to test compatibility and nail down unclear specs...

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#164

Post by agumonkey »

bluetidepro wrote: post #22

One amazing thing to note is that in v3.3.5 (last stable) bootstrap.min.css was at ~123kb. The new 4.0.0 alpha bootstrap.min.css is at ~88kb. WOW. That's just amazing. Congrats to everyone who worked on this project. I'm always so impressed with the work done on it! Also, I want to add, I don't care where you land on the side of the debate whether to use Bootstrap or not, there is some very smart minds behind the pro…

Negative net upgrade is a rare pleasure we all enjoy.

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#166

Post by agumonkey »

jamesdelaneyie wrote: post #162
bluetidepro wrote: post #22

One amazing thing to note is that in v3.3.5 (last stable) bootstrap.min.css was at ~123kb. The new 4.0.0 alpha bootstrap.min.css is at ~88kb. WOW. That's just amazing. Congrats to everyone who worked on this project. I'm always so impressed with the work done on it! Also, I want to add, I don't care where you land on the side of the debate whether to use Bootstrap or not, there is some very smart minds behind the pro…

I used to hate the whole shave kb off a file stuff (its 2015! we'll have superdooper speeds in 5 years!) until someone added up the hardware usage overall worldwide and it made a bit more sense. it made more sense when the crash bandicoot guys had that story about fitting the entire source code onto that cd with 4kb* left. * or thereabouts

> Ultimately Crash fit into the PS1's memory with 4 bytes to spare. Yes, 4 bytes out of 2097152. Good times.

http://www.quora.com/How-did-game-developers-pack-entire-gam...

Re: Bootstrap 4 alpha

#170

Post by msoad »

dlandis wrote: post #56

Does anyone know why they don't want to support right-to-left? I've seen tons of questions and posts about it over the years so I'm surprised that even with the next major release they aren't addressing it. Maybe I'm missing a perspective here though -- don't other people think that rtl should be a core capability of a framework like this? I'm also curious whether accessibility will be improved in 4.x.

I'm curios to know what doesn't work in rtl? Does bootstrap uses `margin-left` and stuff like that? It should be simple to fix it

    .some-class {
      margin-left: 1em;
      &[dir="rtl"] { margin-right: 1em; }
    }
Post reply on HN