Should CSS be a constraint system instead?

(pavpanchekha.com)

37 points fanf2 | 3 comments | 07 Dec 25 18:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.647s | source

Show context

nicoburns ◴[07 Dec 25 19:12 UTC] No.46184193[source]▶

The problem with a constraint system is that it would likely be even more subject to performance problems than the current setup.

IMO what CSS layout really needs is:

1. A "proportion of available space" unit. That is, something like the fr unit in CSS grid except applicable to the width/height properties so it can be used in all layout modes and without an implying content-based minimum size (like fr does).

2. A new "display: stack" (name provisional) layout mode that simply stacks boxes one after the other like "display: block" but that works in both axes, and doesn't have quirks of block layout (margin-collapsing, floats, inline-block splitting, etc).

When combining 1 and 2 you'd have a much more intutive layout system that would still give you most of the power of Flexbox and could be implemented with much better performance.

(and you'd still be able to use the existing layout modes if/when you needed to extra power)

replies(4): >>46184268 #>>46184619 #>>46184644 #>>46185777 #

1. araes ◴[07 Dec 25 22:15 UTC] No.46185777[source]▶

>>46184193 #

What CSS needs (opinion, caveat, really far away in advanced features) is:

- A way to get values from sliders (type="range") (and style and modify them easily). Really, a way to get "value" from any <input> element.

- A way to have radio / checkboxes or labels inside labels work for multiple choices (or something other than making enormous arrays of radio selections and CSS choices)

- A way to have indexed arrays of numbers / choices (other than using a crazy complicated animation timing trick)

- String concatenation thats not so incredibly finicky and difficult to implement correctly

- Some way to retain the final "state" of a condition without resorting to playing an animation on "forwards" mode. Also, related, some way to not require the hidden checkbox hack everywhere.

- (Advanced, lower priority) A way to force var() calculation and optimizations other than making a zillion @property statements. "This expensive trig calculation is used a hundred times later on, better make it a separate ... nvm, it gets regex placed into every other calculation on the entire page ... " ¯\_(-_')_/¯

- If() and Function() ... wait, /inappropriate_swear, we're actually getting these after a quarter century.

replies(1): >>46192393 #

2. nicoburns ◴[08 Dec 25 14:10 UTC] No.46192393[source]▶

>>46185777 (TP) #

It looks like HTML may be getting the ability to manipulate the class/attributes of elements in response to clicks (declaratively, without JS). Which would solve a lot of the interactivity issues (checkbox hack, etc).

See: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Invoker_Com...

replies(1): >>46199192 #

3. araes ◴[08 Dec 25 23:34 UTC] No.46199192[source]▶

>>46192393 #

Thanks. Saw this, thought it looked cool. Just could not find what it can do other than "popover" "popovertarget" without using JS.

The examples provided for custom events all seem to use JS anyways. Ex:

  <button commandfor="the-image" command="--rotate-landscape">

  ...

  if ( event.command == "--rotate-landscape" ) { image.style.rotate = "-90deg" }

Agree it would be cool, it just doesn't seem to do a lot. Generalized "popovertarget" except that basically means +modal <dialog> in most of the examples. And all the modal dialogs are almost always "popover". And you can already make "popover" appear over "popover" with multiple onscreen. Maybe there's something with looking. [1]

[1] https://developer.chrome.com/blog/command-and-commandfor

Edit: Here's an example of the overlapping popover functionality. https://araesmojo-eng.github.io/

Main Page -> General Tests Menu -> Open Popover 1 | Open Popover 2

Should both open popovers simultaneously on top of each other while dismissing neither, and also change the state of elements on the page at the same time.

↑