- From: Kyle Simpson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 14:56:14 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Am I the only one who thinks that's not a "hack" FWIW, I think the "hack" part is not the inheritance, but this in particular: ```css .foo { --width: 20px; width: var(--width); } /* as opposed to: */ .foo { width: 20px } ``` Having to externalize the value *just* so it can be inherited is the "hack", IMO. @castastrophe's suggestion is a bit more ergonomic/readable in that sense, in that you declare the inheritability rather than having to imperatively create the effect in two separate steps. > If "deeply" inheriting stuff is the primary motivation for this feature I wouldn't characterize *my* use-cases with "primary", but I would say "substantial" as opposed to "trivial" or "limited". I also wouldn't say "deep", per se, as there *is* a practical limit to how far up the tree I might need to go... for my purposes, I'd guess that limit is somewhere around 3 or 4 levels of nesting, not 10 or 100. That's why `parent(parent(width))` is, while a bit inelegant, somewhat reasonable, because the number of wrappings I might need to do would rarely if ever be >= 4. But such a syntax *would become* completely untenable at 100, 10, or probably even 5. At worst, that ugliness would serve as a strong hint (code smell) of probably needing to restructure things. That said, the maintainability footgun around such absolute traversal steps still concerns me quite a bit. -- GitHub Notification of comment by getify Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2864#issuecomment-817881305 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 12 April 2021 14:56:16 UTC