The code is as follows:
.home-feat2 {
background-color: stencilColor("color-greyLight");
img {width: 10rem;}
margin-bottom: spacing("single");
#include breakpoint("medium") {
margin-bottom: 3rem;
}
}
Expected declaration to come before rule - order/order points to the line with margin-bottom: spacing("single"); however I tried looking up what this error meant but I can't find a lot of descriptive documentation on stylelint. Maybe it's because I just don't understand the terminology, but I'm having trouble finding anything on this subject. Any help is appreciated.
Your linters expects you to write declarations before rules.
In CSS, a declaration is the key-value pair of a CSS property and its value, like margin-bottom: spacing("single").
See a visual representation of a declaration block.
A rule is the block defined by one or multiple selectors, containing declarations, like: img { width: 10rem; }.
See a visual representation of a rule set.
What it means for you, it means that you should probably write the rule img {} after the declarations:
.home-feat2 {
background-color: stencilColor("color-greyLight");
margin-bottom: spacing("single");
#include breakpoint("medium") {
margin-bottom: 3rem;
}
img {width: 10rem;}
}
This specific rule purpose is to allow an easy to read code.
When applied, you can see at the first glance that background-color and margin-bottom are applied to .home-feat2 and width is applied to img.
edit: added some additional informations thanks to jeddy3
Related
Learning about #mixin and I came across this code. How come the hover-not-disabled on the first line is not followed by () and is it ok to do this? Thanks in advance!
#mixin hover-not-disabled {
&:not([disabled]):hover {
#content;
}
}
.button {
border: 1px solid black;
#include hover-not-disabled {
border-color: blue;
}
}
Its fine. It won't cause any errors, since (…) is meant to contain the arguments which when using a #mixin are usually needed, however in this case the editor wants to pass the mixin into mutliple elements and then edit the #content.
From a subjective point of view, I'd recommned to always include the () for the sake of consistency even if they would be empty, so when quickly scanning the code, nothings seems odd.
So this would be my approach, but generally spoken, it's totally fine to leave them in such cases.
#mixin hover-not-disabled() {…}
#include hover-not-disabled();
I'm using SASS's handy ampersand notation to add BEM-style modifiers to my classes:
.box {
display: inline-block;
width: 100px;
height: 100px;
background: magenta;
&--selected {
background: cyan;
}
}
I'm exploring the possibility of only having to apply a single class to my elements (ex: <div class="box--selected">...</div> as opposed to <div class="box box--selected">...</div>). I'd like to avoid using #extend, it casts too wide a net. Currently I'm using mixins, which are good, but a little verbose to use for every single class with a modifier.
What I'd really like to do is get &--selected to inherit all the properties from the parent enclosure, and only from the parent enclosure - ie ignore any other class definitions of .box that careless devs may have inserted.
I know you've expressed the desire to avoid #extend but this method may allow you to avoid other dev's definitions of .box while still achieving your goal.
You could use placeholders to create your own parent enclosure and extend the placeholder(example of placeholder extension) inheriting only from the placeholder. As a placeholder there is no chance of conflicts with classes from other devs on .box:
%box{
display: inline-block;
width: 100px;
height: 100px;
background: magenta;
}
.box--selected{
#extend %box;
background: cyan;
}
Compared to mixins this method lacks the use of parameters like the following example from the article mentioned above [1]:
#mixin padMasterJ ($param: 10px) {
padding: $param;
}
Another thing worth noting is that when #extend is used on a parent selection the result will include all nested selectors #extend cannot be used to directly extend a nested selector.
I'm not sure this is possible but I feel that it probably is and it's just me doing it wrong. I want to use the ampersand to grab the context of a selector, but I get all it's parents as the context in the compiled CSS, and not just the direct parent. See my gist!
What I would like to do is to give .product-comparison--ftg__entry a width of 50% if it's a decendent of .product-comparison--2.
Play with this gist on SassMeister.
I try to avoid to much nesting and work only with the main identifier. For your case this could be solved like this:
.product-comparison {
&--ftg-entry {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
&--2 &--ftg-entry {
width: 50%;
}
}
I don't know why but while compiling with grunt or anything there is an error called invalid property name
#flotTip {
border: none !important;
font-size: $font-size-small !important;
line-height: 1px !important;
#extend .tooltip-inner() !important;
}
in the above code in the line-height it produces an undefined property. My task was to convert all less files into sass files. Used many solutions to convert all of them to sass as far as I can find. But this one I can't find any solution. Can anyone answer what might be the problem?
Extend is only for extending simple selectors, like class, element, or id. You cannot use !important with #extend. This is the correct way to use extend:
.foo {
color: red;
}
#flotTip {
#extend .foo;
}
You may be confused confusing extends with mixins, which also cannot use !important. This is the correct way to use mixins:
#mixin foo() {
color: red;
}
#flotTip {
#include foo();
}
The line-height: 1px !important; line looks fine. The problem is with the following line. If you're trying to include a mixin, use #include and don't prefix the mixin's name with . (dot). Also, don't put !important after it.
I would guess that you are using #extend incorrectly. See the docs here: http://sass-lang.com/documentation/file.SASS_REFERENCE.html#how_it_works
Is it possible to refer to a property previously defined in a selector without introducing an intermediate variable?
I'd like to say something like:
.foo {
padding: 15px;
width: 300px - $padding;
}
I know that $padding syntactically looks for a defined variable, I only use it in the above example to illustrate what I want to achieve in functionality.
The above example would be equivalent to this:
.foo {
$padding: 15px;
padding: $padding;
width: 300px - $padding * 2;
}
No, you can't, and it would be great.
I haven't tested, but as far as I know the only css pre-processor that can do that is stylus. Look at the variable section in its documentation, where it says Property Lookup. It works that way:
.foo {
padding: 15px;
width: 300px - #padding * 2;
}
But no, in Sass you can't, as far as I'm concerned.
If its an option to use an other preprocessor then scss, I really recommend using Stylus. There is a feature called Property lookup which is exactly what you want.