Re: [css-grid] repeat(auto) issue

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:48 AM, François REMY
<francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
> ± > In fact, this is very similar to a wrapped "flexbox" layout but with alignment
> ± constraints which a flexbox layout cannot give you, including "gaps" between
> ± elements which require specific empty columns.
> ± >
> ± > To me, the issue is that the cases for which you can use automatic
> ± repetition is really too narrow. I would prefer to get something closer to what
> ± we have for flexboxes.
> ±
> ± So it sounds like you're asking for auto-sized rows in repeat(auto)?
> ± This doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me; you only get the flexibility of
> ± auto-sizing on the items that happen to fit in the first row, but all further
> ± rows are constrained.  It kinda makes your design responsive to the item
> ± size, but only the first few items, and I doubt that's all that useful.  If your
> ± items are regular enough for it to be worthwhile, they're regular enough for
> ± you to guess at the size and just use that in repeat(auto); if they're not
> ± regular enough, then the grid constraints on later rows are likely to actually
> ± be unpalatable, and you're likely better off with a wrapping flexbox.
>
> You didn't quite get it. The items have a known size, and let's say I specify it in repeat(auto, ...). What I say is that the current repeat(auto, ...) definition will either generate columns that aren't used and prevent me from centering the grid (I set width: 100%) or will generate no column (if I set width: auto; max-width: 100%; margin: auto) like I want.

Oh!  You mean that you may or may not have enough items to fill a
single line, and if you don't have enough, you'd like the grid to only
generate as many columns as needed?

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 21:51:56 UTC