Ah, a simple display: block on the parent does that in one swoop. What if I wanna bail on the whole flexbox thing at a certain point? Part of me wants to change the direction to go vertical with flex-direction: column and force the children to be full-width. Maybe that should go in the “don’t ever do this” category.
It’s pretty weird to have the source order and visual order different like this. I guess I can just kick it up to flex-basis: 100% and the others will wrap accordingly.
Flexbox csstricks full#
But I meant that I want it to take up the full width on the top row. What if I want that first “Love” block to be on top instead? Looks like I can re-order it, eh? Let’s see, the default order is 0, so to be first, I do order: -1. And it’s by row, which is why the second row has its own different height. That’s the default stretch behavior, but it can be controlled as well. Oh hey, that reminds me how cool it is that those first two items are the same height. We could have also solved it with word-break: break-word hyphens: auto on the child.Īnother thing we could do is just let the dang items wrap instead of being so strict about it. The long word forcing that sizing behavior at narrow widths is perhaps an uncommon scenario. This is maybe CSS Grid territory, but whatever. Sometimes a design calls for exactly equal size boxes. Looks like width: 33% flex-shrink: 0 does though, if we’re really wanting to strongarm it. Looks like flex-basis: 33% doesn’t fix this. The sizing is a bit, uhhhh, flexy? Nothing is forcing these boxes to be one-third of the container all the time. Can I make it a three-up pattern without touching CSS?
Flexbox csstricks code#
I like how I haven’t had to do any math or hard code values so far. Applying flex: 1 to the children allow them to grow and fill the space. Looks like flex: 1 is about as easy as it gets here. Ah yes, flexbox has all of these ways of expressing the growy-shrinky-initial behavior of children. Maybe I can use width: 50% on the children? That works, but I thought the point of flexbox is that you don’t have to be all specific about width. If the parent element has more space than the children need, it doesn’t do anything to help the children fill the space alone. Can I just stretch the parent to 100% wide? Well, I can, but that’s apparently not going to affect the child elements. They should probably take up the full space they have though. I guess I could have floated them, but this is easier. Just adding display: flex to the parent element lays out the children in a row. I just need to put two boxes side-by-side and I hear flexbox is good at stuff like that.
0 kommentar(er)
