Zurb Foundation 5 Released • Hacker News Board

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#121

Post by jessedhillon » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 11:31 PM UTC

lowboy wrote: post #89

Spiritus wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't mind if more projects did this to be honest.

I would, just because it causes fragmentation. PEP-8[0] is a big win for Python. Javascript relies on adhoc standards and best practice docs from respected entities. I'm open to change and debate, but it should be approached carefully. [0]: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/

To be fair, at the time JS was developed, there was a body of well-documented knowledge involving camelCasing. First and foremost was, of course, Java. There are various RFCs involving LDAP schemas as well -- I recall seeing a hilarious document once describing how to properly name the attribute corresponding to an entity's certificate:

   cACertificate*

Talk about slavish consistency.

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#122

Post by cstigler » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 11:36 PM UTC

paisawalla wrote: post #92

Segmentation wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The clear convention in JavaScript is camelCase, why switch away from it? Citation?

How would you even expect this to be cited? Seriously, does someone need to crawl every Javascript project on Github and compile statistics on naming styles before they can make an obviously true statement like this? The fact that camelCase is the norm in the language and browser environment is obvious to anyone who has written even a modest amount of JS. notQuantified != false

notQuantified !== false

to avoid type coercion here

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#123

Post by qhoc » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:02 AM UTC

I switched from Foundation 4 to Flatstrap (a version of Bootstrap) instead because I like the flat UI. v4 had many problems with JS and especially topbar was never good enough. I ended up creating my own topbar which is not ideal. Also the lack of fixed cols is a big issue for desktop design.

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#124

Post by caiob » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:13 AM UTC

nawariata wrote: post #64

masklinn wrote: post #48

Damn, it's gone completely broken on old firefox engines http://i.imgur.com/HAR8Rjz.png (yeah I'm still using Camino when I can get away with it)

I get same result with Opera 12.16.

I guess that's a good thing. They're pushing the web forward.

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#125

Post by caiob » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:14 AM UTC

When will this be available on Rails?

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#126

Post by dkoch » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:22 AM UTC

elithrar wrote: post #105

dkoch wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do people recommend for functionality similar to Interchange on a Bootstrap 3 site?

> What do people recommend for functionality similar to Interchange on a Bootstrap 3 site? Why not just use Interchange itself?

It seems to have dependencies on core Foundation Javascript. I don't think it can be used stand-alone.

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#127

Post by janus » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:25 AM UTC

wildermuthn wrote: post #111

Segmentation wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The clear convention in JavaScript is camelCase, why switch away from it? Citation?

Suggestion: JavaScript.

Camel cased would actually be javaScript

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#128

Post by highstep » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 12:25 AM UTC

ultrasandwich wrote: post #45

Looks like it dropped support for IE8, which unfortunately eliminates this as an option for a lot of client work. Seems like a solid go-to for more forward-thinking projects though.

...this being Foundations greatest failure. Until IE8 is under 2% usage, it going to be hard to convince an ecommerce client that it's OK to leave these users on the table. Sure we can implement workarounds, but that adds a lot of overhead to development.

Does it not make sense for a front-end framework to handle cross-browser compatibility for us?

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#129

Post by amirmc » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 1:05 AM UTC

dodyg wrote: post #66

Jgrubb wrote: post #18

On the one hand it's never been a better time to be a front end dev, and on the other it's absolutely crazy how fast front end technology is progressing the last couple years. I just caught on to Foundation 4 in the last 4 months or so, and now here's a new release that's way more evolved. Amazing. Thanks to the Zurb team! I'll definitely be ripping off lots of ideas for my company's tortoise-speed Drupal sites.

Faster iteration isn't necessarily better actually especially if people don't care forward compatibility. Maybe it's just different culture. For example bootstrap 3 is a breaking upgrade and suddenly your just finished bootstrap 2 is using 'unsupported' framework.

It may have been breaking but they did well to state that it would be breaking and was in development long enough (with RCs) that no-one should be caught by surprise.

I say this as someone who launched a site based on 2.3 as 3.0 entered RC status.

Re: Zurb Foundation 5 Released

#130

Post by jimmytucson » Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 1:06 AM UTC

avolcano wrote: post #94

chrismorgan wrote: post #81

I'm puzzled about the switch from camelCase to snake_case for JS as shown in http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/upgrading.html#javascript-va... . The clear convention in JavaScript is camelCase, why switch away from it? (I say this as someone who in normal life using Python and Rust uses and prefers snake_case but who uses camelCase when writing JavaScript.)

This is insane. I have literally never seen a large-scale open source project or JS style guide that uses snake_case. The DOM is camelCase. jQuery is camelCase. Node APIs are camelCase. Why on earth do Zurb think their library is any different?

Meteor did, at least in the beginning.