Waiting for Firefox 4

I remem­ber that when I was younger I used to play and fid­dle with any new beta that came out.

Back then, when I had a lot more time on my hands and red­dit didn’t exist, a new ver­sion of an upris­ing browser named Fire­fox was releas­ing in late Novem­ber, that was Fire­fox 1.5, code­named Deerpark.

A few months before the release, an alpha was released, and imme­di­etly I started play­ing with it, although it was barely usable, the new fea­tures and improve­ments that came with 1.5 were awe­some. I felt the same kind of rush that you feel when you know you’re get­ting a present that you really want.

With the new release of Fire­fox 4, I feel exactly the same, after almost 5 years of not hav­ing that feel­ing. I’m wait­ing for a browser to be released in it’s final ver­sion. Read the rest of the post…

CSS Efficiency

Con­sid­er­ing how much CSS I write on a daily basis, I never won­dered what is the fastest way to ren­der the CSS I pro­duce, and what are the costs in CPU and load time.

Chris Coyier did a nice research explain­ing what are the most fast and effi­cient selec­tors in CSS,  and I’ll sum­ma­rize his find­ings here.

• Right to Left — Browsers read you selec­tors from right-to-left, i.e. if you have a selec­tor as such: ul > li a[title="home"] the browser will first look for an ele­ment a with the attribute title equal to home and only then check if it’s a descen­dant of an li tag.
• ID’s are the most effi­cient selec­tors, uni­ver­sal selec­tors are the least efficient.
• Tag qual­i­fy­ing (ul#navigation) is very inef­fi­cient, don’t use them.
• Descen­dant selec­tors (html body ul li a) are effi­ciency dis­as­ter as Chris puts it.

To read the rest of the arti­cle I sug­gest you visit css-tricks.com, worth the read.

/e.s

Nature by Numbers

Nature by Num­bers from Cristóbal Vila on Vimeo.

Easing Demo

A lit­tle eas­ing demo that illus­trates the var­i­ous eas­ing functions.

Cre­ated by Rober Pen­ner