Skip to content

Conversation

@ajoslin
Copy link
Contributor

@ajoslin ajoslin commented Mar 20, 2016

Using a write stream, the target file is erased when css-extract starts.

This means that when using livereload with CSS, there are two visible
reloads: once at the start of css-extract with a blank css file, and once
when it finishes with the expected result.

Using writeFileSync, the file is only edited once in place.

Using a write stream, the target file would be erased each time css-extract started. This meant that, when using livereload with CSS, there were two visible reloads: once at the start of css-extract, and once when it finished. Using writeFileSync, the file is only edited once in place.
@codecov-io
Copy link

Current coverage is 100.00%

Merging #1 into master will not affect coverage as of 99c6b39

@@ master #1 diff @@ ====================================== Files 1 1 Stmts 35 38 +3 Branches 0 0 Methods 0 0 ====================================== + Hit 35 38 +3 Partial 0 0 Missed 0 0 

Review entire Coverage Diff as of 99c6b39

Powered by Codecov. Updated on successful CI builds.

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Contributor

This sounds quite reasonable to me. @hughsk what's your take on this?

@hughsk
Copy link
Member

hughsk commented Mar 24, 2016

@yoshuawuyts I reckon let's merge for now to avoid bugs and look into supporting non-inline syntax when we can :)

@hughsk
Copy link
Member

hughsk commented Mar 24, 2016

Oops, wrong issue! This looks good all the same :D

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Contributor

💯 excellent! I'll resolve the merge conflicts and merge

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Contributor

Published as v1.0.4. Thanks for the patch! ✨

@ajoslin ajoslin deleted the write-file branch March 25, 2016 15:00
@ajoslin
Copy link
Contributor Author

ajoslin commented Mar 25, 2016

👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

4 participants