You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@weex.apache.org by Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> on 2017/11/05 06:23:08 UTC
Re: Replace Facebook/Yoga with a new implementation.
How's it going？ We need to release a version as soon as Yoga is removed.
Thanks.
Adam Feng
On 12 Oct 2017, 10:37 PM +0800, 申远 <sh...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> flex-grow is already supported by flex shorthand, and it’s possible to support flex-shrink in later version.
> While, flex-basis is the same as main size which is supported already except for percent value. I think support percent unit is a huge, duplicate and unnecessary work for most CSS style, after all I am trying to achieve an elegant implementation of CSS, excluding dummy, heavy, duplicate part of CSS. But It makes sense that flex-basis should support and only support percent value. For baseline, I think if iOS Framework is able to pass ascent, descent, half-leading, top and bottom to layout engine, layout engine itself has no problem to manipulate these values.
>
> > 在 2017年10月12日，17:16，xing zhang <zh...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >
> > Should we consider about layout percent unit, flex-shrink, flex-grow,
> > flexBasis, and baseline in align-Items ?
> >
> > 2017-10-12 16:54 GMT+08:00 申远 <sh...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I’m considering replacing Facebook/Yoga to a new layout system based on
> > > Google/Flexbox due to Facebook’s additional patent issue. Besides, this new
> > > layout system will provide some new css style like order, etc.
> > >
> > > Any advise for the new layout system?
> > >
> > > PS: I need some advise about the name of the layout system.
>
Re: Replace Facebook/Yoga with a new implementation.
Posted by 申远 <sh...@gmail.com>.
Extremely busy coding for double 11 now.
> 在 2017年11月5日，14:23，Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> 写道：
>
> How's it going？ We need to release a version as soon as Yoga is removed.
>
> Thanks.
> Adam Feng
>
> On 12 Oct 2017, 10:37 PM +0800, 申远 <sh...@gmail.com>, wrote:
>> flex-grow is already supported by flex shorthand, and it’s possible to support flex-shrink in later version.
>> While, flex-basis is the same as main size which is supported already except for percent value. I think support percent unit is a huge, duplicate and unnecessary work for most CSS style, after all I am trying to achieve an elegant implementation of CSS, excluding dummy, heavy, duplicate part of CSS. But It makes sense that flex-basis should support and only support percent value. For baseline, I think if iOS Framework is able to pass ascent, descent, half-leading, top and bottom to layout engine, layout engine itself has no problem to manipulate these values.
>>
>>> 在 2017年10月12日，17:16，xing zhang <zh...@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>
>>> Should we consider about layout percent unit, flex-shrink, flex-grow,
>>> flexBasis, and baseline in align-Items ?
>>>
>>> 2017-10-12 16:54 GMT+08:00 申远 <sh...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I’m considering replacing Facebook/Yoga to a new layout system based on
>>>> Google/Flexbox due to Facebook’s additional patent issue. Besides, this new
>>>> layout system will provide some new css style like order, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Any advise for the new layout system?
>>>>
>>>> PS: I need some advise about the name of the layout system.
>>