`flex-wrap: wrap;` and maybe, if you want, a `min-width` on the boxes themselves
Wrapping is undesired, the linear presentation is critical here. And the box is the screen in this case, on a mobile one the highest order buttons are missing. It’s sad that this had been up for so long with no real solutions. A genuine failure of the CSSWG.
You can't have >x of reasonably sized and spaced boxes on a screen horizontally without wrapping, regardless of layout engine. Besides, wrapping can be done presentationally while keeping the linearity.
In this case, I'd probably switch to an automatic grid layout with equal size boxes regardless of content size. Then it could neatly wrap into multiple rows while keeping the boxes at a constrained size.
i dont really know if there's a game in this? the first thing you do when you learn about how number bases work is do a few conversions. This gives you 3 crass ones - then lets you make up your own? and thats it.
If there was some binary addition, subtraction, bitflipping, and other "tricks" of working with binary, or shortcuts/pattern recognition - i think there would be more to this.
Wrapping is undesired, the linear presentation is critical here. And the box is the screen in this case, on a mobile one the highest order buttons are missing. It’s sad that this had been up for so long with no real solutions. A genuine failure of the CSSWG.
You can't have >x of reasonably sized and spaced boxes on a screen horizontally without wrapping, regardless of layout engine. Besides, wrapping can be done presentationally while keeping the linearity. In this case, I'd probably switch to an automatic grid layout with equal size boxes regardless of content size. Then it could neatly wrap into multiple rows while keeping the boxes at a constrained size.
Yes you can, it’s called scrolling. And the items on the right of the screen are indeed accessible via scrolling, it’s the items on the left of the screen that are entirely inaccesible. There is no possible justification for this design, it’s pure slop. (CSSWG’s design, not this site which is hamstringed by their incompetence)
I'd love to use this tool with my high school CS class, but the "suggestive" numbers would, unfortunately, prevent me. Great concept and well implemented! -specifically, some of the first few numbers are 69 and 80085
Why. 69 is a number, if your students happen to find it amusing surely that's good?
I'm not going to entertain my students with crass humor.