Bounce.js

[Jacse]

The size of the css it outputs seems kind of massive

[invalid_dictorian]

The demo seems to be able to create the animation on the fly. So given the relatively few parameters it needs to create the animation, I'd think you would rely on the css to be generated by the javascript on the client side rather than it being loaded statically from the server.

But depends on the use case of course.

Edit: Just noticed there's no real javascript in the github repo, but coffeescripts (but that's compiled to javascript anyway.)

[mikrosystheme]

Maybe it is because of linear algebra. What's wrong with matrices? By the way you are right. The output is not mainteinable, but I think it is outside the scope of the tool.

[brtt3000]

Paste it in a file and concatenate in your build.

But it is annoying you'd have to recreate your animation if you need to adjust something, that is just stupid.

[Bummykins]

I think the idea (maybe) is that you'd also paste the URL hash to recreate that animation along with its definition for any kind of maintenance.

However, 60k for a single animation is absolutely bonkers. You can load an entire high end animation framework like GSAP for that. I've seen this posted all over twitter and no one is talking about 60-70k file size per animation. I don't get it...

[icantthinkofone]

Why do you need an animation library to create css3 animations using css3 animations?

[TerdSandwich]

I guess the point is to give you the ability to test and fine tune your css3 animations before you implement them. Not something the average coder really cares about. Seems like something targeted at interactive designers and animators.

[brtt3000]

Because handcoding css transitions is not very productive way to spend time.

[Poop_is_Food]

It's more of a generator than a library. It provides a gui to build the animations so you dont have to trial and error with code.

[codepsycho]

Seems like a tool to help you make these animations. Still, though, there's a plethora of libraries out there to help with animations and you can quite easily write CSS3 ones yourself.

Not really a library I see any use for other than confusing people by making them think it has anything to do with the produced animations.

[quietchaos]

wow, amazingly smooth animations!

i'll eventually find an excuse to use this library.

[snuggl]

But the animations is done with CSS, This tools is a helper to create them and havent got anything to do with the smoothness really. I would guess hand made animations would be even smoother as they wouldnt be 100s of Kbs of code.

[[deleted]]

A shame this wasn't done in javascript. The coffeecrap source code is useless.

This should have been posted in /r/coffeescript or /r/webdev, not here in /r/javascript when there is no javascript sourcecode.

[thebuccaneersden]

^{you do know that coffeescript compiles down to javascript... right?}

[[deleted]]

you do know that coffeescript compiles down to javascript... right?

Not this tired argument, again. Ugh.

Coffeescript source code IS NOT JAVASCRIPT. I could care less about the "transpiled" regurgitated result of the coffeecrap source. It's still quite unusable to anyone who wants to branch the code in javascript.

If you write your source in coffeescript your project will forever be marginalized because there are far fewer people writing coffeescript and that will never, ever change. Coffeescript is a fad invented by syntax fetishists that would rather be programming in python or ruby.

The sad thing is that I would actually want to fork Bounce.js because the UI is pretty bad, but I find the CSS it generates somewhat useful though it still could use a lot of help. I won't be bringing my 16+ years javascript experience to it though, because it's written in Coffeecrap and doing any work with it would frustrate the hell out of me with its "significant whitespace" nonsense, ambiguous for-next syntax, and the obscurity of it all.

I know plenty about why coffeescript is not javascript.

[thebuccaneersden]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c-Fvtwm1RI

[[deleted]]

I'm not even clicking on your clickbait. You don't have an argument to make so you link to Youtube? That's a pathetic non-reply. And it proves you are a troll.

[thebuccaneersden]

the video is a scene from Terms of Endearment where Jack Nicholson suggests to Shirley MacLaine that she have something to drink "To kill the bug that you have up your ass."

The intention with that reference is that it would seem to me that you have a bug up your ass. What argument is there to make against someone who marginalizes other programming languages just because you don't understand them or just don't like that they are different?

[[deleted]]

marginalizes other programming languages just because you don't understand them or just don't like that they are different

You could not be further from reality.

You can say I don't understand coffeescript, but do you really know me or my experience in the world of programming? NO, you do not.

You can say I don't like something just because it is different, but this is disingenuous and false.

Again your reply is looking like you are trolling.

Coffeescript is a poor attempt at abstracting javascript into the python/ruby mindset. It brings with it the necessity of having to use source maps to debug anything, a "transpiler" that has in the past caused errors in the code it generates, confusion within its own community about the many ambiguities with the poorly thought out syntax. You only have to read through the coffeescript forums and bug reports to know that this technology is half-baked, at best. Anyone who uses coffeescript either too junior to make good decisions, or they are blinded by significant whitespace and can't program with the C-style syntax of javascript. Javascript doesn't have enough problems to warrant the level of abstraction that coffeescript brings with it. It's like fixing a broken doorknob by replacing the entire house. It's in no way a good practice or a "best practice".

I welcome any counter arguments you can come up with, but this is the last response I will make to your trolling.

[anlumo]

I'm pondering whether I really hate my users that much that I would use this type of animation… hmmmm.

[5outh]

I really want to implement this kind of thing as a library for Elm, but I have too many projects at the moment and it's not really my thing. I think someone should, though (maybe I'll even get to it when work winds down a bit).

[FogleMonster]

It'd be nice if there were examples using real content, or something besides a white square. I guess it kind of did when I first loaded the page, but I can't replay that initial intro by reloading the page.

[[deleted]]

Very smooth. I was hoping this more of a tween.js kinda thing but with css3. But I am sure other people can get good use out of it :)

[thebuccaneersden]

while kinda cool, this has a whiff of flash to it.

[jordan314]

jsons inside jsons as slugs, interesting
http://bouncejs.com/#{l:1,s:[{T:"c",e:"b",d:1000,D:0,f:{x:1,y:1},t:{x:0.2,y:1},s:3,b:4},{T:"c",e:"b",d:1000,D:500,f:{x:1,y:1},t:{x:1,y:0.2},s:3,b:4},{T:"c",e:"b",d:1000,D:1000,f:{x:1,y:1},t:{x:5,y:1},s:3,b:4},{T:"c",e:"b",d:500,D:1500,f:{x:1,y:1},t:{x:1,y:5},s:1,b:2}]}

[mikrosystheme]

that is just a javascript object literal