I was discussing wanting to build a decent framework with my ex, and I said it would be a ‘cool’ thing to do. A brief bit of word association to-and-fro and me being reminded of the lyric/phrase ‘Cooler than a polar bear’s toenails’ I/we arrived at Inuit :)
I've used inuit in a couple projects (though not the most recent version) and would highly recommend it.
The trend lately seems to be immediately reaching for Bootstrap, which is a little bit shameful for those who might consider themselves legit front-end devs. While bootstrap is a great tool for prototyping, it's also led to a lot of boring, cookie-cutter apps.
Bootstrap sites only look cookie cutter if you use the default styling out of the box. If you take time customize the styles, you can get fairly differentiated sites.
For a framework it might be a nicer option, so that you can drop a module by only deleting the include reference rather than permanently deleting dozens of lines. Perhaps. It’s largely down to taste I imagine :)
I recently used a bastardisation of v3 and v4 (I was using v3 then you released v4) and I split each object into separate files and left the imports commented out in the main.scss file.
I then uncommented each object as I used it so I didn't reach the end of the project with unused objects in the CSS and not being able to remember whether or not I had actually used them.
I did a similar thing with the grid module: commented out all sizes and uncommented what I used as I went.
As far as I'm concerned CSS is no different than any other code and should be separated into modules so it's easier to read and understand. This is especially true if you're using something like SCSS.
This SMACSS book recommends this and frameworks like Bootstrap and Foundation pretty much follow that approach.
I personally like working that way, but I think I might split it out so that dropping an object only takes deleting one line from a file and not dozens :)
More importantly when people contribute or wish to extend the project they can do so by adding a new module file instead of editing the existing code. Open closed principle.
Also if people are importing using SMACSS they can also select individual modules to import if they prefer that to importing everything.
15 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 48.0 ms ] threadCheers, H
For a brief instant I thought it could be an official release from them, but then I realized they aren't that cool of a company.
The trend lately seems to be immediately reaching for Bootstrap, which is a little bit shameful for those who might consider themselves legit front-end devs. While bootstrap is a great tool for prototyping, it's also led to a lot of boring, cookie-cutter apps.
Check out some of the styles on https://wrapbootstrap.com/.
It seems to be a more designer-friendly framework.
Haven't tried inuit.
I then uncommented each object as I used it so I didn't reach the end of the project with unused objects in the CSS and not being able to remember whether or not I had actually used them.
I did a similar thing with the grid module: commented out all sizes and uncommented what I used as I went.
This SMACSS book recommends this and frameworks like Bootstrap and Foundation pretty much follow that approach.
Also if people are importing using SMACSS they can also select individual modules to import if they prefer that to importing everything.
https://github.com/csswizardry/inuit.css/blob/master/inuit.c...