Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lightning CSS to replace postcss build commands #191

Draft
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

argyleink
Copy link
Owner

@argyleink argyleink commented Feb 15, 2022

todo

  • move the poc command line added to package.json to all the postcss commands
  • use package.json inline template syntax to DRY it up
  • test before and after filesizes (for funsies)
  • test and inspect all output to ensure no regressions (ongoing though)
  • determine how to, or if OP continues to, combine selectors

this proves the groundwork though, and given the output is smaller, than this PR is a go 👍🏻

@argyleink argyleink added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 15, 2022
@argyleink argyleink self-assigned this Feb 15, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 15, 2022

Visit the preview URL for this PR (updated for commit 438df24):

https://open-props--pr191-use-parcel-css-540c65nl.web.app

(expires Wed, 16 Mar 2022 05:46:28 GMT)

🔥 via Firebase Hosting GitHub Action 🌎

@argyleink
Copy link
Owner Author

much faster builds on this 2010 machine 👍🏻

@devongovett
Copy link

Hey @argyleink! Anything you need help with to get this in? 😄

@argyleink
Copy link
Owner Author

i dont think there's any technical stuff in the way, it's me mostly ironing it all out and doing all the cross checks to ensure to regressions 🙂

thanks for checkin in!

@argyleink
Copy link
Owner Author

just spent an hour doing builds and testing/inspecting output! there's a lot of great things going on in this, speed being a huge one.

having the logical properties syntax lowered, even place-items, are adding lots of lines of code. makes me want to bundle 2 versions and do the like, modern css vs syntax lowered css builds. if i offer them on the cdn or via exports, they could pick which they snag. i don't see any ways of specifying via cli options to not lower logical props? feature request 🙂 btw though, the syntax lowering of logical props is super impressive and rad.

i love the syntax lowering of color! love the clean output.

it looks like i could switch to parcel for just builds of the basic files right away, but not normalize since it almost doubled from logical property lowering. but, it's so fast. the main consumed files are mostly values, not logical properties, and it's really only a few lines of change to package.json.

i dont think i'd want to juggle both postcss and a parcel tool, but maybe i do! will think and check more.

@devongovett
Copy link

Logical properties lowering is based on the targets specified to the CLI. You have "last 2 versions", which would include eg ie 10 and 11. Usually it's better to do a browserslist query based on market share percentage. You can play around here: https://browserslist.dev

@argyleink argyleink changed the title @parcel/css-cli to replace postcss build commands Lightning CSS to replace postcss build commands Sep 14, 2022
@argyleink
Copy link
Owner Author

todo: try with the latest Lightning release

@github-actions
Copy link

Visit the preview URL for this PR (updated for commit 0379e9d):

https://open-props--pr191-use-parcel-css-92b626xs.web.app

(expires Wed, 27 Sep 2023 05:37:22 GMT)

🔥 via Firebase Hosting GitHub Action 🌎

Sign: 32524ac481f54edda55dc959fa4614cf1acc8c11

@bjorntheart
Copy link
Contributor

@argyleink is this still something you'd want for OP? If so, my PR you recently merged would need an update to use lightningcss. I'm happy to make those changes once/if this is merged.

@argyleink
Copy link
Owner Author

@argyleink is this still something you'd want for OP? If so, my PR you recently merged would need an update to use lightningcss. I'm happy to make those changes once/if this is merged.

i've been testing it more in OPv2 branch, and still not entirely sure I'll go with it in the end. but thanks for checking and the offer! for now I'd say hold off 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants