- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 21:30:15 +0200
- To: "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "'Marat Tanalin'" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>, "Tab Atkins" <jackalmage@gmail.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
> On 6/2/15 2:40 PM, Marat Tanalin wrote: > > 02.06.2015, 21:36, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>: > >> On 6/2/15 2:29 PM, Marat Tanalin wrote: > >>> In your example, `a` and `b` are undefined since `c` is not specified. > >> > >> Er, I meant, of course: > >> > >> a: var(b); > >> b: var(c); > >> c: var(d); > >> d: var(e); > >> e: color; > > > > Then values of `a`, `b`, `c`, `d` depend on what is `color` (as long as we have > nesting-level limit greater than 5). > > Sure, but what if it's, say, 3? Does "a" have a value? Does "c"? Does it > depend on whether "a" or "c" is computed first, or whether they're > computed in parallel? I'm just going to point out this is a false problem. I already proved a perfectly fine solution to this problem existed, which had no evaluation-order dependency, and which could be executed in parallel like a charm. I even provided an implementation and a complete demo for people to try out. This was three years ago. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Oct/0599.html The algorithm I proposed had the added benefits that it supports things like: --a: var(--b, none); --b: var(--a); resolving to: --a: none; --b: none; while the current algorithm says both resolve the 'initial' as the declarations are invalid (sic). At the time, this proposal was rejected because "it is not useful to create cycles in variables" (according to some very interesting definition of useful, of course, because I know for sure use cases do exist when you want to create layouts using custom properties by creating overconstrained dependency cycles which become well-constrained once you defined some number of values previously computed by formulas). Like I said to Lea before, right now, I'm not interested anymore in spending my personal time fighting for what I believe CSS Custom Properties should have been, but I'm annoyed to see this thread going nowhere and wasting everyone's time. The real issue is not the algorithm, it's that supporting more properties would require work that browser vendors are not ready to pursue (yet). This thread has moved on to trying to solve an already solved problem. Given you are now 5-mails-fewer away from Inbox Zero, take some time to drink some coffee and enjoy your day :-) François
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2015 19:30:39 UTC