Cycle not automatically being set to denominator
digitalmaster opened this issue · 9 comments
Can you provide the generated CSS with that bare bones example (just for the broken one)?
/*------------------------WORKING---------------------------*/
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name {
*zoom: 1;
width: 100%;
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name :not(input):not(textarea):not(select) {
background-color: rgba(0,0,255,0.1);
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name:before {
content: '';
display: table;
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name:after {
content: '';
display: table;
clear: both;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input {
width: calc(99.99% * 0.5 - (30px - 30px * 0.5));
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(n) {
float: left;
margin-right: 30px;
clear: none;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:last-child {
margin-right: 0;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(2n) {
margin-right: 0;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(2n + 1) {
clear: left;
}
/*------------------------NOT WORKING---------------------------*/
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name {
*zoom: 1;
width: 100%;
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name :not(input):not(textarea):not(select) {
background-color: rgba(0,0,255,0.1);
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name:before {
content: '';
display: table;
}
.basicinfo-form > .legal-name:after {
content: '';
display: table;
clear: both;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input {
width: calc(99.99% * 0.5 - (30px - 30px * 0.5));
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(n) {
float: left;
margin-right: 30px;
clear: none;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:last-child {
margin-right: 0;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(undefinedn) {
margin-right: 0;
}
.basicinfo-form .text-input:nth-child(undefinedn + 1) {
clear: left;
}
I just noticed the undefinedn
.. That's obviously the reason. Question now is just why.
@digitalmaster What pre-processor are you using?
It looks like your pre-processor might be doing the division of lost-column: 1/2
and is making it lost-column: 0.5
. Thus, lost-cycle doesn't have a denominator to reference. I've heard there might be some issues with Less regarding this.
Yup.. Makes sense. That did it. Thanks
@digitalmaster Thanks for bringing it up! I don't use Less as much as I used to these days so it's great to hear from users. 👍
I think LESS might introduce a literal(...)
function sooner than later just to avoid all these Issues.