Repository navigation
[css-grid] comma in repeat() #334
Description
In light of recent discussions on commas inside functional notations (issue #266, https://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/functional-notation#general-principles) ... shouldn't the comma in repeat() be dropped?
Activity
FremyCompany commentedon Jul 20, 2016
It could be confusing though because repeat(3 0) would be a valid way to create 3 empty tracks.
rachelandrew commentedon Jul 21, 2016
I think it would be very confusing. The comma is useful here and I see no benefit from removing it.
fantasai commentedon Jul 26, 2016
The benefit would be to have the contents of the functional notation follow the syntax conventions of CSS property values. (Which don't use commas except for fallbacks/layering/lists.)
FremyCompany commentedon Jul 27, 2016
An option would be to do
repeat(3x [line] 100px)orrepeat(3: [line] 100px)FremyCompany commentedon Jul 27, 2016
Actually the first one isn't a good idea, 3x looks like 3px where you forgot the p.
svillar commentedon Jul 27, 2016
I also find the syntax without the comma very confusing. And in any case the WG is not proposing to change anything in grid, nor even minmax() which is considered a math-y function.
tabatkins commentedon Aug 2, 2016
@fantasai and I have talked about this, and agreed not to change Grid in this respect.