Oh wonderful! Another 10 years and we can use it natively without polyfills!
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
328 points (98.8% liked)
Programming
21206 readers
262 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's already supported by ~~96%~~ 87% of browsers currently in use.
I think this is what you should be looking at, which is at 82%
https://caniuse.com/mdn-css_properties_align-content_block_context
Ah, that makes sense
load more comments
(6 replies)
Doesn't stop your manager from requiring support for the other 4%.
Most websites these days refuse to support even Firefox.
~~Yeah, pretty much as Flex at 97% which is a nice comparison.~~
Edit: See mattd’s comment
load more comments
(1 replies)
Why are we not angrier about css generally?
Because things were much worse in the beforetime
What, you didn't enjoy slicing up images and arranging them in borderless tables?
Eh the software handled all that. Rounded corners tho…
Rounded corners tho…
Just a small gif (as png didn't exist/widely supported) that had the rounded corner. Then if someone wanted to change the color or background you would have to redo all the images. Fun fun.
Nah it's fine, we'll just do the whole website in Shockwave.
WYSIWYG editors were evil
The software? Are you talking about Adobe ~~Dreamweaver~~ Dreamcrusher or something?
Please indicate where IE touched you.
In my faux column
load more comments
(1 replies)
I am blisteringly angry about CSS in general AND THIS FUCKING ISSUE IN PARTICULAR since 2005 at the very latest. Likely enough to up the average for several thousand people with only mild dislike for CSS.
If CSS had a church I would burn it down. In minecraft of course.
I would say because a) there are zero alternatives, and b) it's pretty powerful; you can generally do pretty much any layout even if it requires hacks, c) switching to something else is clearly infeasible so it's not worth even asking for.
Just have to live with it (on the web at least).
d) we remember the world before it was introduced
It good
What we were promised:
Content in one HTML document.
Styles in other CSS, able to apply any to completely alter the layout of the document.
What we got:
<div class="mt mid flex lt-8 no-margin up-1">
CSS 3 is solid, mate. You can do just about anything with it if you know what you're doing.
Some of the pure CSS stuff I've seen is actually insane.
Obviously not actually for real world use, but a great example is https://github.com/kkuchta/css-only-chat
With pseudo sectors, flex, and grid, your options are amazing. I haven't encountered a design I can't build in a very long time.
load more comments
(1 replies)
BaCkWaRdS cOmPaTiBiLiTy 😵💫
load more comments
(2 replies)
* { display: flex; }
Is it just me or is the irony lost on the author? It says "align-content: center" but it's only vertically aligned...
That's because under flexbox for horizontal alignment you use a different property called justify-content.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Because we already have a way to center text horizontally...
Yes but my grief was with the naming... why not call it vertical-center? Just "center" is very confusing to me because it does not include horizontal.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Well that came like 10 years too late lol
I don't think I'll ever use it considering it was already easily possible with flexbox, and before that (although dirtier) with tables as well.
Well, we've been vertically centring content with no-trick pure CSS for years now, so, good I guess?
It's worthless if you have to give it an explicit height, and also if it doesn't have support in all browsers.
view more: next ›