• StefanS (unregistered)

    .first0, .first1, .first3 { visibility:hidden; /css ninja/ }

  • RLB (unregistered)

    Someone doesn't know what id is for.

  • Anon (unregistered)

    Most customers only see the website, they really don't care what kind of code is behind it at all. And your PHB might be the same.

    Try to refactor it and you will be reprimanded by your boss for spending company time on such unimportant things (unimportant to him).

    Oh and in keeping traditions with this website it's not brilliant: it is brillant!

  • Momek (unregistered)

    Surprised? It's a CSS Ninja, not a CSS Guru!

  • Anon (unregistered)

    To be fair, there is nothing wrong with absolute units without knowing the project it's used in.

  • Anon (unregistered)

    To be fair, there is nothing wrong with absolute units without knowing the project it's used in.

  • NoLand (unregistered)

    I think, this probably goes with the understanding of a ninja – a true ninja won't wander the expected path. That said, I'm a bit disappointed that hsla( 33, 66, 100, 1) isn't used for white, which would have been much more unexpected and stealthy.

  • (nodebb)

    I'm going to call myself a SQL assassin on my resume. I KILL queries.

  • Ant man (unregistered) in reply to tahir_ahmadov

    hahahaha 2 funny with the SQL assassin love it...

  • NoLand (unregistered) in reply to Momek

    I think, "Guru" was before that. When ninjas were en vogue, ronins were the equivalent of who may now claim the title of an "experienced CSS engineer". :-)

  • Brian (unregistered)

    I had a headhunter contact me once looking for code ninjas or something like that. I told her that "ninja" was below my pay grade; I'm only interested in "Guru"-level positions or higher.

  • Matt (unregistered)

    What's wrong with absolute units? This is something that design dictate, not a general rule.

    Different display sizes might get different media queries or/and totally different HTML.

    Author tries to be a 'guru' here.

  • Karl Bielefeldt (github)

    That's pretty much the definition of a ninja. You never see the death and destruction coming.

  • (nodebb)

    You should be using px in CSS now. They’re no longer absolute units, but refer to a reference pixel, that is resolution and display density independent (in theory).

    In practice, browsers on low-dpi displays often map them 1:1 by default.

  • sizer99 (google) in reply to Anon

    I'm pretty sure that hardcoding it to 180x140 pixels is dead wrong even without knowing what the application is. Padding you can do a little hand-waving with, sure, 15 px of white - it's got a border, fine. For a content element that can be shown on a 1280x720 screen or a 3840x2160 screen, no. And if anyone pulls the eyeroller that maybe it's specced for a single screen resolution - that never lasts unless the product just dies.

  • (nodebb) in reply to sizer99

    These days CSS pixels are not the same as screen pixels. Considering I have 2880 x 1440 in the palm of my hand that would be insane!

  • xtal256 (unregistered)

    Yeah, pixels have been redefined due to idiots like this. These days, a mobile browser will fake their screen size to be smaller than what it is (my mobile has the same pixel resolution as my desktop!) so that the web page appears at a reasonable size. Hell, the designers at my company seem to work exclusively in pixels.

  • RLB (unregistered) in reply to sizer99

    If only because half the time, a report which was sized for a full window will later need to be shown in a sub-panel half the width. Even if the pixels remain the same, that's just not the same size.

  • Barf4Eva (unregistered) in reply to tahir_ahmadov

    A Sql Buttbuttin, to be precise...

  • Git Dervish (unregistered)

    Is "Git dervish" already taken ?

Leave a comment on “Class Warfare”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article