- From: Rune Lillesveen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 11:05:01 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> @lilles Some follow-up about nesting in mixins… I don't think that constraint would be a blocker for making this a useful feature. I'm curious if there's any useful distinction between between nested selectors that change the subject, and those that only add additional constraints? For example, selectors like `& > p` or `& + p` would require finding a new selector subject, while `&:hover` adds a constraint to the existing subject. > I don't think that would be different. The common thing is that nesting in this case dynamically combines parts of the selectors from the mixin and the apply and that would require the implementations to connect those pieces at a later stage than the parser, and that the multiple applications branch into multiple ancestor selectors. For nesting it's much easier since it's done at parse time and the selector representation can be fully built at parse time. How complicated and how much of a re-organization of the selector matching/invalidation code this is depends when we can resolve the mixin applications. -- GitHub Notification of comment by lilles Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9350#issuecomment-1723188151 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 18 September 2023 11:05:03 UTC