1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Which software is best for css web page desgin?

Discussion in 'CSS' started by happydigger7, Oct 30, 2009.

  1. silverf0x

    silverf0x Active Member

    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    78
    #21
    silverfox like this :)
    SEMrush
     
    silverf0x, Nov 16, 2009 IP
    SEMrush
  2. vinpkl

    vinpkl Active Member

    Messages:
    901
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    58
    #22
    i also use dreamweaver as it provides different color code syntax highlight.

    I test the results in all browsers.

    i dont depend on dreamweaver design mode for viewing result.

    vineet
     
    vinpkl, Nov 17, 2009 IP
  3. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,157
    Likes Received:
    1,708
    Best Answers:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #23
    My condolences, that's got to be a living hell. So, is that the company that has multiple HTML and HEAD tags with the pointless scripting and broken layout on their main page, or the one with the flashtard site header with no graceful fallbacks, broken scripted menu, color choices that don't meet accessibility minimums and that mm_swap javascript nonsense?

    Biggest doesn't mean their product is any good. Usually it means stamping things out cookie cutter with little to no quality control - See McDonalds.
     
    deathshadow, Nov 17, 2009 IP
  4. Rob B

    Rob B Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #24
    I wouldnt call it a living hell more a dream job :). What a silly accusation, considering were the best in the country. i would say that leaves you behind us! and maybe you should view our portfolio before saying the product may not be any good.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2009
    Rob B, Nov 26, 2009 IP
  5. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,157
    Likes Received:
    1,708
    Best Answers:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #25
    URL? Just which 'largest' design company is that?
     
    deathshadow, Nov 26, 2009 IP
  6. Stomme poes

    Stomme poes Peon

    Messages:
    3,195
    Likes Received:
    136
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #26
    Now now, just because Rob's company is saddled with an overpriced TEXT EDITOR doesn't mean good can't come from it : ) Paul O'B uses dreambeaver (if you've already got it, and it's got your settings re code indentation etc, why not use it?). Besides, it keeps them out of the vi/emacs war : )

    I'm not a fan of the onmouseover junk in the HTML, the javajunked print buttons and the microscopic grey text on white background (or worse, the microscopic grey text on GREY background), but I think most of that can't be blamed on dreambeaver. One is perfectly capable of writing valid, clean, semantic code in DW... it's a text editor.

    I use gEdit and (g and terminal)vim, depending on whether I'm writing locally or over FPT... soon as I figure out how to let vim accept text copied from a browser I'm set. Bleh. Must be a Gnome setting...

    jQuery:
    User object model? Explain? Do you mean, "written for people who are writing Javascript who cannot write Javascript"? If so, that makes sense, though I wonder how it goes with languages like Curl (... or Lisp).

    Apparently that was supposed to be "naturally understood by CSSers". #id's and .classes.

    The rest is people using a tool the wrong way. Like using Photoshop to generate HTML code. Guess that's just natural when something gets hyped and popular. It(jQuery and friends) still likely has its place somewhere. I hear Photoshop is really great at making... pretty pictures n stuff.

    I accidentally discovered something called "object oriented CSS". My god, my heart goes out to the code monkeys who have to deal with the bloated HTML (looks as bad as microformats without the arguments that it's somehow worth it).
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2009
    Stomme poes, Nov 26, 2009 IP
  7. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,157
    Likes Received:
    1,708
    Best Answers:
    239
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #27
    ... and yet the number of people who manage to do so can be counted on one hand.

    Nope, not even close... I'm referring to how memory and code is allocated under the hood, as well as the pointer structures required for the code to run. I'm referring to the difference between 'system code' - aka stuff built into the language, and 'user code' which is code written in javascript - like jquery itself. "User built objects" means objects (or classes if you prefer) built by the programmer, not by the interpreter (the interpreter is what javascript runs 'in')

    Javascript is at it's heart an interpreted language, one that you cannot even really do JIT on since it can also be self modifying. For interpreted langauges to be 'efficient enough' for use they have to unload as much functionality as possible onto 'system functions' - aka the functions built into the language. Objects built into javascript typically have all their functions and handlers written in optimized C/C++ code - they run fast, many times faster than javascript itself can run. The Variable memory space in every javascript implementation (even under chrome) is slow as molassas.

    A great example is the old programming trick of using an array lookup for SIN instead of using the mathematical SIN function. In compiled languages with a static heap making an array filled with SIN values (or arctan or any other complex math) is generally faster than the actual mathematically precise function - especially when you rarely need granularity higher than screen width*6... You try that in javacript, and the interpreter is so slow at using array indexes you are better off using the math.sin function.

    Another example is how people coming from PERL go "regular expressions are slow and should be avoided" when compared to the PERL code equivalent to a regex the opposite is true. Regular expressions are optimized compiled code, and more often than not optimized compiled code will generally execute in a hell of a lot less time than iterating through a string one character at a time in an INTERPRETED language like php, perl or Javascript.

    If javascript was a compiled language, jquery would be great. Bits not used wouldn't be included in the executed code, references to existing functions would be compiled out without the extra stack/heap allocations, stuff written in it would have a proper heap and variables would be pre-allocated by offset.

    But in an interpreted language EVERY variable is allocated on the fly, there's endless overhead for each variable reference (and therein object references), user built objects being so much slower than system based ones, etc, etc. It's like driving with the parking brake on.

    ... and is why in an interpreted language extending objects or using objects by a translated reference is a REALLY bad idea.
     
    deathshadow, Nov 27, 2009 IP
  8. Grue

    Grue Peon

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #28
    Hurh? Perl regexes are slow? Or you mean they're slow in JS? In Perl they're pretty damn fast, depending on how they're written, of course.

    Edit: apologies for possible thread hijack ;)
     
    Grue, Nov 27, 2009 IP
  9. Stomme poes

    Stomme poes Peon

    Messages:
    3,195
    Likes Received:
    136
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #29
    Ah, okay.

    So if we're already building stuff like getElementByClass in any non-trivial JS, when does it matter if it's all shoved in a library?
     
    Stomme poes, Nov 27, 2009 IP