- From: Romain Menke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 18:29:47 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Is this preferable? Is it more understandable? No this is, in my personal opinion, much worse. :) Which is also why I doing my best to avoid `@nest;` until I can find a good example of CSS code where it feels natural and can be presented as a good thing. But in these examples `@nest` is not required because of the coding styles used: - at rules come first, so you already have a trigger for the parser switch - modifiers come second (`&:focus` or `&.something--modifier`) - children last `.child` equivalent to `& .child`. - complex things hidden at the end. ---- > since you are arguing that ampersands should not kick the parser into rule mode Not saying that. I am concerned about a parser switch that appears once. With a required `&` or `@nest .foo &` in each selector you have more context as a reader. -- GitHub Notification of comment by romainmenke Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7834#issuecomment-1270512614 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2022 18:29:49 UTC