Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariCSS-On-Diet vs Sly
When comparing CSS-On-Diet vs Sly, the Slant community recommends Sly for most people. In the question“What are the best CSS preprocessors/postprocessors?” Sly is ranked 8th while CSS-On-Diet is ranked 15th. The most important reason people chose Sly is:
By using whitespaces and nesting, you don't need braces or semicolons. This helps with keeping the syntax as readable and minimal as possible.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Fast to read and write CSS
Works like Emmet, shorting CSS keywords, but it's not limited only to writing. Also modifying and reading COD(CSS-On-Diet) files is faster.
Pro Easy to learn and use
Doesn't require programming skill to work with variables, mixins, media breakpoints
Pro Readable syntax
By using whitespaces and nesting, you don't need braces or semicolons. This helps with keeping the syntax as readable and minimal as possible.
Pro Supports variables out of the box
Sly has out of the box support for variables.
Cons
Con It's difficult adjusting to different keywords
The keywords are shortened to 3 letters. For example, "background-color" becomes "bac" and "max-width" becomes "maw". These keywords are far less intuitive than their original form and make the CSS much less readable for those who don't know CSS-On-Diet.
Con Extremely limited adoption
CSS-On-Diet has just 7 stars on Github and a very small adoption rate. For an open source project this usually means less bugs reported, lesser documentation and few third-party learning resources.
Con Extremely limited adoption
Sly has just 5 stars on Github and a very small adoption rate. For an open source project this usually means less bugs reported, lesser documentation and few third-party learning resources.
Con Not stable
Sly is in the alpha stage.
