548
Average CSS (lemm.ee)

I am not allowed to credit the site that has this disaster. Its owner said "Nobody should see that"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] drathvedro@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Huh, neat. The last time I looked, chrome was also plagued by this. Might actually re-start some projects I had, but it sucks to have to use chrome.

inline-flex is indeed necessary since we're growing left to right and flex would take the entire/fixed width, unless it's also inside a flexbox.

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

it sucks to have to use chrome

I also hate to admit it, but Chrome currently is the superior browser.

[-] drathvedro@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Chromium is a superior engine, yes. But Chrome itself, at least in my eyes, looks to be the least capable browser out of the bunch. I'd rather Vivaldi if I had to switch.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Inline is never needed and you already know that.

[-] drathvedro@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

EDIT: Alright, this is a terrible case because the parent element has flex and therefore no inline-flex is necessary there, but I'd argue it's the parent element being flex that is redundant, rather than child element being inline.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Inline means that your element should be treated like text. If your element is not text, then you shouldn't use inline. In this screenshot the element is text, so it's ok.

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
548 points (96.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

19817 readers
907 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS