I am not allowed to credit the site that has this disaster. Its owner said “Nobody should see that”

  • TechieDamien@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    12 days ago

    Client: “Can you switch these two colours, you have 1 minute to fix it or you’re fired!”

    Result:

      • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        At least that’s actually easy and quick to do and is the only way of doing it. Centering a div however has 81639393 ways and it seems the one that works is different every time

        • Codex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          46
          ·
          12 days ago

          Bro its so easy bro, just use flexboxgridcolumns its been a standard since 2010 just flex it bro you haven’t learned to flex yet just check w3c schools and add a flex you can polyfill it but don’t use that hacked one use the good flexpolyfill then { content-align-middle-child-elements: center-middle-true-neutral } so easy with flex bro

          • CatLikeLemming@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            12 days ago

            I know you meant this sarcastically, but yes, flex is a good option for centering something. Either that or setting the left and right margins of the element to auto, which is generally even easier.

            Basically, if you’re in a flex container use flex, if you’re in a grid use grid, and if neither of those apply set the left and right margins to auto.

            • marcos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              11 days ago

              Also seriously, anybody having problems with flexbox should try this:

              https://flexboxfroggy.com/

              I’m not sure there’s any version of it for grids, but IMO grids are inherently more intuitive, so it may not be needed. Flexbox is the one that is hard to learn.

              • CatLikeLemming@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 days ago

                Well, flexbox and grid have different purposes in my opinion/experience. Personally I use grid for “top level” layouts like the layout of the whole site, while I tend to prefer flexbox for layouts inside the grid. Of course that’s just a rule of thumb, there are absolutely cases where this isn’t the best option.

              • davidgro@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 days ago

                I don’t know any CSS (despite reading memes about it like this) but I do know that the bottom of that page has a link to something called Grid Garden

          • drathvedro
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            It’s 2024 and flexboxes still don’t work that well with vertical direction and wraparound…

              • drathvedro
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                Sure. Here you go. The green container should cover all red boxes in both cases. I’ve been bashing my head against this issue for a while, but, as far as I understand, this is a bug that’s never going to be fixed. Which sucks, because I wanted to re-design some of the apps in the horizontal metro-style scrolling manner for the bottom screen on my zephyrus duo, but this effectively prevents me from doing so (Unless I use grids and set positions manually).

                • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  That’s interesting. Chrome displays it as you intended, Firefox doesn’t. I guess it’s required that the vertical flex be inline-flex?

      • kamen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        It’s a good indicator that someone is desperate and/or doesn’t know what they’re doing.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 days ago

    Not allowed to credit the site in your text editor?

    Is the owner in the room with you now?

  • drathvedro
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    11 days ago

    I’m appalled that classes representing visual styles are still a thing. I thought everyone already figured that it was a bad idea back in bootstrap days. But then I recently had an opportunity to work on project that uses Vuetify and saw quite long poems about flexboxes in class names…

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      Well, there’s not exactly a class training you have to take before writing CSS, so everyone starting out with it gets to make all those same mistakes for themselves before they know how to use classes sensibly. I myself am some backend guy, who has to write CSS far too often.

      It certainly also does not help that various CSS frameworks out there do exactly that…

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 days ago

        It certainly also does not help that various CSS frameworks out there do exactly that…

        Bootstrap (as of v5) being one of them. div class="d-flex gap-2 my-3 align-items-center flex-nowrap justify-content-between

        I was annoyed at this at first, but I’ve since noticed that I write hardly any CSS any more, because most rules really are “just add some space, vertically align, be red”.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          Yeah, the reason why people deride it, is because it’s practically equivalent to:

          div style="flex: 1; gap: 2em; margin-top: 3em; margin-bottom: 3em; ..."
          

          I had to look up what these do, so they might not be precisely correct translations, but hopefully, you get the idea. It’s mostly like using inline styles, and like not using classes.

          In some scenarios, these frameworks might simplify certain things, like how my applies two CSS rules. And they reduce the visual clutter of inline styling somewhat.

          But overall, it feels like people are dissatisfied with semantic classes, but don’t want to lead the discussion for using inline styles, so they grab these CSS frameworks to pretend that they’re not using inline styles.

          It is fundamentally a difficult discussion to lead, because inline styles feel great, while you’re writing them. They’re less great for maintenance.
          But semantic classes definitely have long-term problems, too.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 days ago

          Could argue here that you’re still writing CSS, just cross compiling to it from Bootstrap shortcuts.

    • smooth_tea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      “Figured it was a bad idea” actually means that some people were against it because they believed semantic class names were the solution, I was one of them. This was purely ideological, it wasn’t based on practical experience because everyone knew maintaining CSS was a bitch. Heck, starting a new project with the semantic CSS approach was a bitch because if you didn’t spend 2 months planning ahead you’d end up with soup that was turning sour before it ever left the stove.

      Bootstrap and the likes were born out of the issues the semantic approach had, and their success and numbers are a testimony to how real the issue was, and I say this as someone who never used and despised bootstrap. Maintaining semantic CSS was hard, starting was hard, the only thing that approach had going for it was this idea that you were using CSS the way it was meant to be used, it had nothing to do with the practicality. Sure, your html becomes prettier to look at, but what good is that when your clean html is just hiding the monstrosity of your CSS file? Your clean html was supposed to be beneficial to the developer experience, but it never succeeded in doing that.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        There’s nothing hard about semantic naming. Especially when you’re separating your elements into components and use SCSS or some other pre-processor.

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    “Some coders just want to watch the word burn get colored white and/or lime.”

    And if you delete one or the other, or condense the code into a single command, the whole site breaks.

    • wizzor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 days ago

      I don’t get it, isn’t this a pretty normal way of using media queries. Granted you’re more likely to see the widths defined in px.

        • usernamefactory@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          This is technically responsive, but I think you have a fair criticism. A single rule like this would be much more maintainable:

          #content .grid-container {
          	width: 90vw;
          	min-width: 12rem;
          	max-width: 75rem;
          	padding: 2rem 0 1rem;
          }
          

          Obviously, media rules have their place, but not for something that’s consistantly a full width container like this seems to be.

      • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 days ago

        Shhh… The poster doesn’t understand CSS and we shouldn’t embarrass them in a community with memes

        • wizzor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 days ago

          My imposter syndrome kicked in full swing. I was ready to learn a CSS best practice and feel uncomfortable about it for the rest off the day.

  • dajoho@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    I am very, very surprised about the competence of the commenters here. I have had many discussions on reddit about the advantages of meaningful instead of presentational class-naming and you’re normally met with great resistance, especially with users of frameworks like Bootstrap and Tailwind.

    Here, everyone seems to either ‘get it’ or is willing to hear why classes like .lime are bad. Very cool.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 days ago

      Yeah, userstyles are wild. You learn so many ways how to not use CSS. Everything is !important and rather than adjusting the HTML to change the structure, you get to do it all in CSS. 🫠

  • bloubz@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    12 days ago

    I guess the class matches the color of the background (applied on a parent element), and the text is the opposite color?

  • Holzkohlen@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 days ago

    I hate all webdev beyond using raw HTML, CSS and Javascript to make your own crappy website