I am not allowed to credit the site that has this disaster. Its owner said "Nobody should see that"
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
546 points (96.7% liked)
Programmer Humor
19564 readers
589 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I love the superstitious z-index just in case it does something to help.
At least that's actually easy and quick to do and is the only way of doing it. Centering a div however has 81639393 ways and it seems the one that works is different every time
Bro its so easy bro, just use flexboxgridcolumns its been a standard since 2010 just flex it bro you haven't learned to flex yet just check w3c schools and add a flex you can polyfill it but don't use that hacked one use the good flexpolyfill then { content-align-middle-child-elements: center-middle-true-neutral } so easy with flex bro
It's 2024 and flexboxes still don't work that well with vertical direction and wraparound...
Do you have an example?
Sure. Here you go. The green container should cover all red boxes in both cases. I've been bashing my head against this issue for a while, but, as far as I understand, this is a bug that's never going to be fixed. Which sucks, because I wanted to re-design some of the apps in the horizontal metro-style scrolling manner for the bottom screen on my zephyrus duo, but this effectively prevents me from doing so (Unless I use grids and set positions manually).
That’s interesting. Chrome displays it as you intended, Firefox doesn’t. I guess it’s required that the vertical flex be
inline-flex?Huh, neat. The last time I looked, chrome was also plagued by this. Might actually re-start some projects I had, but it sucks to have to use chrome.
inline-flexis indeed necessary since we're growing left to right and flex would take the entire/fixed width, unless it's also inside a flexbox.Inline is never needed and you already know that.
EDIT: Alright, this is a terrible case because the parent element has flex and therefore no inline-flex is necessary there, but I'd argue it's the parent element being flex that is redundant, rather than child element being inline.
Inline means that your element should be treated like text. If your element is not text, then you shouldn't use inline. In this screenshot the element is text, so it's ok.
I also hate to admit it, but Chrome currently is the superior browser.
Chromium is a superior engine, yes. But Chrome itself, at least in my eyes, looks to be the least capable browser out of the bunch. I'd rather Vivaldi if I had to switch.