When comparing Sass vs Krita, the Slant community recommends Krita for most people. In the question“What are the best web design tools?” Krita is ranked 2nd while Sass is ranked 3rd. The most important reason people chose Krita is:
All the most used and useful tools are easy to find in Krita's UI and are often just one click away. They are not hidden behind menus or dropdowns.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Powerful advanced function features
You are able to declare custom functions with Sass (for example, converting units) which can be easily invoked, even when using shorthand properties. This results in cleaner, more reusable code.
Pro Nested selectors
Sass allows you to nest selectors which results in code that is both faster to write and cleaner to read.
For example, this:
.parent
color: blue
.child
color: yellow
Will compile to this:
.parent {
color: blue;
}
.parent .child {
color: yellow;
}
Pro Rapid development
Another big advantage for Sass is the very active community pushing the development forward at a rapid pace. Sass is constantly coming out with bug fixes, and are often the first to come out with improvements.
This is an important factor to keep in mind when picking a preprocessor to invest your time into.
Pro Extends CSS maintaining compatibility with CSS standards specification
It comes with two possible syntaxes:
- Sass - No parens or semicolons allowed and the nesting is dictated with whitespace.
- SCSS - SCSS syntax is a superset of CSS – which means SCSS can be written as CSS, but has been expanded to include the features of Sass as well.
SCSS is easier to pick up for beginners and Sass has a cleaner syntax. Having both syntaxes means you can pick the one that best suits your coding style.
The mandatory syntax rules for both SCSS and Sass results in a more consistent code. For a more detailed analysis between Sass and SCSS go here. To see a nice comparison of the Sass syntax against CSS and SCSS go here.
Pro Output minified CSS
Sass simplifies minifying CSS files by offering a one-line command that will output a minified version.
Pro Easy to learn
It's very comfortable and easy to write/learn Sass, even for beginners.
Pro Compass framework provides added features
Sass can be used with a framework called Compass, which provides additional functions and mixins which can reduce the amount of code you have to write.
For example, Compass will take care of vendor prefixes.
This:
div {
background-image: -webkit-linear-gradient(#F00, #000);
background-image: -moz-linear-gradient(#F00, #000);
background-image: -o-linear-gradient(#F00, #000);
background-image: linear-gradient(#F00, #000);
}
Can be written as:
.gradient {
@include background-image(linear-gradient(#F00, #000));
}
For a full list of features, check out the Compass documentation.
Pro Source maps support
Rather than being limited to editing the outputted CSS file in devtools, with source maps you are able to manipulate the original .scss file.
Pro Libsass - C/C++ port of Sass
There is also a C/C++ port of the Sass CSS precompiler called Libsass that decouples Sass from Ruby. It is very fast, portable and easy to build and integrate with a variety of platforms and languages.
Pro New sass package means you no longer need external dependencies
The latest implementation of Sass is written in Dart, and compiles to pure JS with no native code or external dependencies, means you no longer need Ruby or libSass.
Pro Easy to use with ruby apps
Since it's written in Ruby, it's easier and faster to use with Ruby apps.
Pro Easy to use layout
All the most used and useful tools are easy to find in Krita's UI and are often just one click away. They are not hidden behind menus or dropdowns.
Pro Constantly updated
Krita is getting constant releases with updates and bug fixes. New features are added at a pace that far surpasses the other alternatives.
Pro Free and open source
Krita is completely free and open source. They have raised a couple of successful Kickstarters in the past to get the initial financing and now they are accepting donations.
Pro Developed in part by KDE, which has a great community and therefore great support.
KDE has a long history of making solid applications.
Pro Amazing support for displaying brushes
Krita's preset brushes are one of the default dockers. Each brush has a preview on mouseover that shows a detailed view of the type of brush involved. All the brushes also have useful and descriptive names such as "HP Pencil" or "Textured Fuzzy".
Pro Very customizable
Although the UI is rather busy, Krita is very customizable. The editing window can be themed and the sidebar can be customized extensively throw many dockers or panes.
Pro Easy editing in a tiled view
Tiled view that shows your image tiled in the editor, and permits you to edit it as you are seeing it tiled. If the brush passes out of your texture, it will just automatically wrap back the painting to the other side of the original texture, while permitting you to paint and see the results on any of the tiled "clones" (the shortcut key to activate this is w by default).
Cons
Con Requires Ruby or libSass
To compile Sass, it needs either Ruby or libSass installed locally.
Con Noisy syntax
There is many unnecessary characters when using the SCSS syntax.
{}:;@
However using the Sass syntax eliminates them.
Con New features are not tested thoroughly
Since releases are so often and with little time between them, usually new features are not tested a lot and this can bring a lot of bugs with them. Which fortunately are quickly patched in the next release.
Con Documentation is lacking
Krita's official documentation is incomplete in some areas, especially for new features that are constantly added. But this is compensated with it's great design and usability which makes it easier to understand how things work.
Con Poor touch controls
They are still pretty much a WIP. But they are getting there.