Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bingemaker's commentslogin

Looks more or less like GoF? Maybe compressing files and optimizing 3rd party js files are not patterns.

This reminds me of https://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell. Endless iterations with cat pictures thrown into the mix.


I'm not sure turning CSS into a full blown language is a good idea. With all the cascading in place, it is already a bit hard to determine why certain styles are applied. Now with this, we will be spending more brain cells debugging CSS issues.


On the contrary, a lot of the reason CSS is confusing is because it's full of insane hacks people have to do to get the behaviour they want. A straight-up if statement is much simpler than many of the horrors I've seen.


>On the contrary, a lot of the reason CSS is confusing is because it's full of insane hacks people have to do to get the behaviour they want.

CSS is confusing because the vast majority of web developers never learned it properly. Many developers won't learn any "new" CSS (like CSS Grid which shipped in all browsers in 2017) beyond the hacks they learned in the '90s and early 2000's.

That's not the fault of CSS.


> CSS is confusing because the vast majority of web developers never learned it properly. Many developers won't learn any "new" CSS (like CSS Grid which shipped in all browsers in 2017) beyond the hacks they learned in the '90s and early 2000's.

Disagree. The newer stuff is, if anything, more confusing. The old stuff, awful as it was, at least had a consistent model.


> Disagree. The newer stuff is, if anything, more confusing. The old stuff, awful as it was, at least had a consistent model.

With the "old stuff", we didn't a layout model or an alignment model. Everything required float and positioning hacks to do things they weren't designed to do. There's no logical way that was "better."

There were several different grid systems, all mostly incompatible with each other, which were required to do anything interesting.

Many layouts that are common today were impossible to do with just HTML & CSS back in '90s and 2000's.

Capabilities that almost all developers had to reach for a framework Bootstrap or Foundation for are built-in to CSS today. Or lots of JavaScript.


css definitely shouldn't have backwards branches (loops/recursive functions), but adding a little more power can clean up expression a ton and make reading/applying that much faster


I wish the "little more power" would add CSS modules. It would also be great if web components didn't require Javascript and could be configured with pure HTML and CSS.

I will kiss the feet of the whatwg groups if they do this.

PS: Would also love to have declarative template inclusion now that removal of XSLT has also removed this facility from the browser.


Care to elaborate this statement: "TIL about banished Rama and Sita from the Bhagavad Gita"?


Yes, a quick search on the subplot reveals nothing Romeo&Juliet-ish about it.

Nor "Shakespeare in Love"ish.


Having lots of money to throw at moonshot problems is always important. The current breakthrough of the 2020s is LLMs. I wonder if such breakthroughs can be achieved with this kind of approach.


Pardon my ignorance, but is recording a call without informing the other participants considered bad practice?

Congrats on the launch! :tada:


You're right, and I agree that participants should be aware when they’re being recorded

Because consent laws are complex and vary by region and industry, we leave the consent flow to the developer and we provide the tools and guidance to do it correctly. As with our Meeting Bot API, we also urge teams to follow local laws and make recording clearly visible to users


Thanks for the clarification.


It's not just bad practice, it's illegal in many countries. It is in France for instance - but it's not like you can actively prevent it


It's illegal in some states, legal in others.

Consult Linda Tripp


Wish she was around!


Also wondering this.


Thoroughly enjoyed while it lasted! Thank you maintainers.


Unsure if this is inspired from C++ RAII. RAII looks very elegant.

`[Symbol.dispose]()` threw me off


> Unsure if this is inspired from C++ RAII.

Not really. Both are ways to perform deterministic resource management, but RAII is a branch of deterministic resource management which most GC'd languages can not use as they don't have deterministic object lifetimes.

This is inspired by similar constructs in Java, C#, and Python (and in fact lifted from C# with some adaptation to JS's capabilities), and insofar as those were related to RAII, they were a step away from it, at least when it comes to Python: CPython historically did its resource management using destructors which would mostly be reliably and deterministically called on refcount falling to zero.

However,

1. this was an issue for non-refcounted alternative implementations of Python

2. this was an issue for the possibility of an eventual (if unlikely) move away from refcounting in CPython

3. destructors interact in awkward ways with reference cycles

4. even in a reference-counted language, destructors share common finaliser issues like object resurrection

Thus Python ended up introducing context managers as a means of deterministic resource management, and issuing guidance to avoid relying on refcounting and RAII style management.


Thanks for the explanation


At the moment, I use Windsurf to explain me how a feature is written and how to do 3rd party integrations. I ask for the approach and I write the code myself. Letting AI write the code has become very unproductive over the period of time.

I'm still learning though


>I ask for the approach and I write the code myself. Letting AI write the code has become very unproductive over the period of time.

Ask it to write out the approach in a series of extensive markdown files that you will use to guide the build-out. Tell it to use checklists. Once you're happy with the full proposal, use @file mentions to keep the files in context as you prompt it through the steps. Works wonders.


Will try this approach. Thanks Ramesh


They already have an org github.com/mozilla. Why didn't they move ff source there?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: