Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. CCS is worst language ever created

CCS is worst language ever created

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
javascriptcsstutorialquestioncareer
45 Posts 26 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Slow Eddie

    Haters are going to hate. I don't know much JavaScript, never worked in it. But I have made a very nice living/career over the last 43 years with VB. :) All languages are just syntax. VB is a tool just like any other. If you misuse an axe bad things are going to happen to you. I am sorry to learn that someone who does "Thought for the Day" could be such an elitist. Oh well Nobody is perfect, including both of us. :(

    A lot of people bash things they don't understand, or use properly.

    OriginalGriffO Offline
    OriginalGriffO Offline
    OriginalGriff
    wrote on last edited by
    #34

    It's not elitism, it's "On Error Resume Next". Any language which supports that should be strung up and whipped ... :laugh:

    "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

    "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
    "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt

    T 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B bjoernen

      No language has casued me more grief in my 30+ year career than CSS. It is almost like some form of black magic, where you can never be 100% sure what a page will look like. Even for the simplest designs you have to allocate 4 hours, just to make sure it looks the same in all browsers. Why the decision to write an enormously complex layout engine, and then keep adding more bloat to it every year? Why not let the page designer interact with the layout engine instead, as it is laying out the elements on the page? It could be done through JS calls, or even by writing simple math formulas into the CSS, that refer to the sizes of other elements. For example "the width of this element should be equal to half the width of that element". Then let the browser's layout engine simply be a multi variable equation solver. End of rant.

      Bjorn

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Martin ISDN
      wrote on last edited by
      #35

      separation of content and style, that's what they say when they teach little kids about css the next logical step it was i never new what hit me, that was around 98. i discovered it was css when every page broke on every browser. it was said that browsers were guilty of not heaving decent support for it. for me it was the other way around, so i never looked at css whenever i see it embedded in html i just skip that part

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B bjoernen

        No language has casued me more grief in my 30+ year career than CSS. It is almost like some form of black magic, where you can never be 100% sure what a page will look like. Even for the simplest designs you have to allocate 4 hours, just to make sure it looks the same in all browsers. Why the decision to write an enormously complex layout engine, and then keep adding more bloat to it every year? Why not let the page designer interact with the layout engine instead, as it is laying out the elements on the page? It could be done through JS calls, or even by writing simple math formulas into the CSS, that refer to the sizes of other elements. For example "the width of this element should be equal to half the width of that element". Then let the browser's layout engine simply be a multi variable equation solver. End of rant.

        Bjorn

        B Offline
        B Offline
        Bruce Patin
        wrote on last edited by
        #36

        That's why we have LESS and SASS, both able to do what you and I want. Personally, I still prefer using tables for layout, because it doesn't move elements around in odd places, as floating divs often do, but I am trying to get used to it, because it can make it easier to have one page for all sizes of screens.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • OriginalGriffO OriginalGriff

          It's not elitism, it's "On Error Resume Next". Any language which supports that should be strung up and whipped ... :laugh:

          "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

          T Offline
          T Offline
          tbim
          wrote on last edited by
          #37

          Just never use "On Error Resume Next" and turn on Options Explicit and Strict. Easy. I much prefer C#, but I spent years in VB and then VB.Net and never understood the hate. Still don't. If the hate is because of the capability of misusing it, I can do that in C# too. Or maybe it is because it has built-in settings that are questionable to non-VB users (Explicit and Strict)? Maybe I'm missing something. But I don't care as I don't use VB anymore (since 2005). I prefer C#'s syntax. On the other hand, if someone could explain the reason VB is so bad (without the hate), I would welcome the education. Send me a private message or point me to a well-written post.

          Mike

          M 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • B bjoernen

            No language has casued me more grief in my 30+ year career than CSS. It is almost like some form of black magic, where you can never be 100% sure what a page will look like. Even for the simplest designs you have to allocate 4 hours, just to make sure it looks the same in all browsers. Why the decision to write an enormously complex layout engine, and then keep adding more bloat to it every year? Why not let the page designer interact with the layout engine instead, as it is laying out the elements on the page? It could be done through JS calls, or even by writing simple math formulas into the CSS, that refer to the sizes of other elements. For example "the width of this element should be equal to half the width of that element". Then let the browser's layout engine simply be a multi variable equation solver. End of rant.

            Bjorn

            S Offline
            S Offline
            Steve Naidamast
            wrote on last edited by
            #38

            Like you, I have worked in our profession for a very long time, retiring in 2014 after 42+ years in this career. Its not that I had gotten fed up working with the technologies. I simply couldn't stand the arrogant incompetents any longer. So I believe I know where you may be coming from. However, I think you may be confusing the way CSS should be used and the way it has been abused. CSS is very good for simply making generic styles for a variety of HTML interfaces given its object-like nature for such definitions. However, like all software tools, its creators and users\developers seem to have to always extend their tools to death implementing ambiguity after ambiguity until people eventually react to all the bloat as you have with CSS. The problem with all software today is that both vendors and developers simply can't desist from creating and\or using every possibility any single language and\or framework is capable of or provides. Look at the recent "innovations" with the Microsoft frameworks. Do we really have to give up the standard framework implementations to create a quality application? Not really. Its just that Microsoft can't seem to leave well enough alone with what it already has. And if it wanted to refine the existing tools, fine, but why go and create an entirely new framework infrastructure leaving everyone to have to consider yet again another conversion? Its not as if many developers are really going to see any substantial improvement in efficiency and performance with the new frameworks while being forced to abandon the older ones. And if they do, they have already given up something to gain either. In the end, it is always a zero-sum game. The problems you legitimately see with CSS are merely an outgrowth of an industry that has already passed its development zenith and now has no idea what to do with itself...

            Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com

            M 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • T tbim

              Just never use "On Error Resume Next" and turn on Options Explicit and Strict. Easy. I much prefer C#, but I spent years in VB and then VB.Net and never understood the hate. Still don't. If the hate is because of the capability of misusing it, I can do that in C# too. Or maybe it is because it has built-in settings that are questionable to non-VB users (Explicit and Strict)? Maybe I'm missing something. But I don't care as I don't use VB anymore (since 2005). I prefer C#'s syntax. On the other hand, if someone could explain the reason VB is so bad (without the hate), I would welcome the education. Send me a private message or point me to a well-written post.

              Mike

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Matt McGuire
              wrote on last edited by
              #39

              nothing wrong with VB.net, except MS decided to stop growing the language; about that time I decided to fully switch over to C#. I worked in VB (classic) for years and got a lot done, it was a great way to get a quick UI working that worked. plenty of hooks to tie into the lower API of windows and c/c++ libraries. when .net came out, it was a no brainer to switch. each language has it's strong points and weak points, but times change. a couple years ago I wouldn't have though you could use Rust for web dev but now we can with webassembly. I didn't think I would like javascript because of it's typeless programming, but have now found it's wonderful for web. if it wasn't for Android, I'd never touch Java again though, just something about that language that I find painful. no offence to Java devs out there, it's just not my cup of tea.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B bjoernen

                No language has casued me more grief in my 30+ year career than CSS. It is almost like some form of black magic, where you can never be 100% sure what a page will look like. Even for the simplest designs you have to allocate 4 hours, just to make sure it looks the same in all browsers. Why the decision to write an enormously complex layout engine, and then keep adding more bloat to it every year? Why not let the page designer interact with the layout engine instead, as it is laying out the elements on the page? It could be done through JS calls, or even by writing simple math formulas into the CSS, that refer to the sizes of other elements. For example "the width of this element should be equal to half the width of that element". Then let the browser's layout engine simply be a multi variable equation solver. End of rant.

                Bjorn

                M Offline
                M Offline
                Matt McGuire
                wrote on last edited by
                #40

                CSS can be frustrating at times. without the integrated debug tools in browsers to modify element styles and see the instant results or dig down into the layout, web development would be so much more painful.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Steve Naidamast

                  Like you, I have worked in our profession for a very long time, retiring in 2014 after 42+ years in this career. Its not that I had gotten fed up working with the technologies. I simply couldn't stand the arrogant incompetents any longer. So I believe I know where you may be coming from. However, I think you may be confusing the way CSS should be used and the way it has been abused. CSS is very good for simply making generic styles for a variety of HTML interfaces given its object-like nature for such definitions. However, like all software tools, its creators and users\developers seem to have to always extend their tools to death implementing ambiguity after ambiguity until people eventually react to all the bloat as you have with CSS. The problem with all software today is that both vendors and developers simply can't desist from creating and\or using every possibility any single language and\or framework is capable of or provides. Look at the recent "innovations" with the Microsoft frameworks. Do we really have to give up the standard framework implementations to create a quality application? Not really. Its just that Microsoft can't seem to leave well enough alone with what it already has. And if it wanted to refine the existing tools, fine, but why go and create an entirely new framework infrastructure leaving everyone to have to consider yet again another conversion? Its not as if many developers are really going to see any substantial improvement in efficiency and performance with the new frameworks while being forced to abandon the older ones. And if they do, they have already given up something to gain either. In the end, it is always a zero-sum game. The problems you legitimately see with CSS are merely an outgrowth of an industry that has already passed its development zenith and now has no idea what to do with itself...

                  Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  Matt McGuire
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #41

                  I'm not up to your 42+ years yet, only at 22+. there are days where I feel the industry is changing too fast for no apparent gain, but a lot more bloat. Not much chance of mastering a language anymore before it's replaced, or 'updated'. although I agree partially with the original poster, I feel the responsibility for the odd behaviors of CSS lie in the browser engines not standardizing how it's implemented. like I can build something that looks great on Chrome, Firefox, and Android, but totally breaks on iOS products. (I'm not counting IE anymore it's gone, and new Edge is chrome underneath).

                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B bjoernen

                    I'm not talking about clever ways to generate complex CSS, I'm talking about expressing relationships between page elements that is not possible at all with current CSS. For example: "The height of element B is 1/10th of what ever the page height is at the moment. The width of element A should be equal to the height of element B, but only if B's height is less than 100px, in other case it should be half of the height of element B.". Here is how simple it could look in theory: B.height = PAGE.height / 10; A.width = B.height < 100px? B.height : B.height / 2;

                    Bjorn

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    Daniel Will
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #42

                    That feature doesn't exist, because IMO it's something that we shouldn't do to begin with. Websites are displayed on various screen sizes, contrary to Windows App which almost definitely shown on a monitor. If you fixed the size of element b as 1/10 of total web page's height, it will be nightmare/unreadable on some screen sizes. If it's screen size, there already "vh" and "vw" as unit size.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • B bjoernen

                      No language has casued me more grief in my 30+ year career than CSS. It is almost like some form of black magic, where you can never be 100% sure what a page will look like. Even for the simplest designs you have to allocate 4 hours, just to make sure it looks the same in all browsers. Why the decision to write an enormously complex layout engine, and then keep adding more bloat to it every year? Why not let the page designer interact with the layout engine instead, as it is laying out the elements on the page? It could be done through JS calls, or even by writing simple math formulas into the CSS, that refer to the sizes of other elements. For example "the width of this element should be equal to half the width of that element". Then let the browser's layout engine simply be a multi variable equation solver. End of rant.

                      Bjorn

                      B Offline
                      B Offline
                      BotReject
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #43

                      What bugs me is how unintuitive CSS is - simple rational commands have irrational behavior. Personally I like web pages that are simple and content-driven, without too many frills, bells and whistles - like they used to be! I often despair at the state of web technology - what should be a simple task of laying out information on a screen can become 'black magic' as you say. It's bizarre that we have arrived at this state of affairs.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • M Matt McGuire

                        I'm not up to your 42+ years yet, only at 22+. there are days where I feel the industry is changing too fast for no apparent gain, but a lot more bloat. Not much chance of mastering a language anymore before it's replaced, or 'updated'. although I agree partially with the original poster, I feel the responsibility for the odd behaviors of CSS lie in the browser engines not standardizing how it's implemented. like I can build something that looks great on Chrome, Firefox, and Android, but totally breaks on iOS products. (I'm not counting IE anymore it's gone, and new Edge is chrome underneath).

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Steve Naidamast
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #44

                        I stopped enjoying web development basically after ASP.NET MVC was increasingly adopted, though I worked on one of the largest ASP.NET MVC projects at the time in the US (2010). With the exception of this one consulting assignment, I nonetheless, stayed with WebForms until I retired. I simply could not understand the need to create such a new framework, (though the actual MVC technology was designed in the 1970s) with its massive increase in complexity. I understood the limitations of WebForms but found that if implemented properly offered a better structure for compartmentalization where MVC took such compartmentalization to an extreme. I also had an engineering book written by a former Silicon Valley internals engineer who demonstrated that despite its pilloried reputation, WebForms could easily deliver lightening fast performance if configured properly against the hardware being used along with the proper configurations under IIS. But everyone wanted to play with the new toys... Now what do we have? A categorical mess of tools and environments for the web that are all basically predicated on JavaScript, HTML, and CSS (with JavaScript being one of the worst languages ever created for the web), bloated out front-ends as the era of the thin-client was forgotten, and increases in defects as teams rush to get their developments into production with their new fangled techniques of development (ie: Agile, DevOps, DevSecOps, and god only knows what else). I imagine this turn of events came, in part, from the new theory on economics, which is supposed to provide an increasing amount of choices to the customer, when in reality good economic theory should provide an equitable balance. But with the world of the "MeToo" faithful, everyone is casting their lots with all these new techniques and technologies with the hopes that maybe they too will hit something to help make them some extra monies. I still do my own development with WPF and a game development engine but I do not see a good future for our field in the long term with such present trends. I see things only getting worse as software development becomes as much a bloated mess as US society has become...

                        Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • B bjoernen

                          I'm not talking about clever ways to generate complex CSS, I'm talking about expressing relationships between page elements that is not possible at all with current CSS. For example: "The height of element B is 1/10th of what ever the page height is at the moment. The width of element A should be equal to the height of element B, but only if B's height is less than 100px, in other case it should be half of the height of element B.". Here is how simple it could look in theory: B.height = PAGE.height / 10; A.width = B.height < 100px? B.height : B.height / 2;

                          Bjorn

                          H Offline
                          H Offline
                          harvyk0
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #45

                          Whilst I don't disagree with you re:CSS, in that example you've given it could be easily achieved using JS / jQuery. It's simply a case of picking the right language for the job. Of course as others have picked up on, doing that might cause all sorts of strange behavior once you start looking at the various sizes of screens your page may show up on, from 1 inch watches to 100 inch projectors. You just can not be sure of the scale your user will be using.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups