[feat] Support Sass

[ismail9k]

Introduction

According to the The State Of CSS 2019, Sass has the most users count and the most satisfaction percentage, so to reach a wider users base we must support Sass. On the other hand, Sass and Stylus are too much alike, it will be an easy task to migrate the code base for Stylus into Sass.

Drawbacks

Each fix/feature will be added to two different sources, doubling the maintaining efforts. Although the two pre-processors have a very similar syntax, their compiler is completely different, this could result in a slightly different output.

[logaretm]

I think we should switch to SASS, we can do it incrementally and use scss syntax to make the transition smoother. I don't think maintaining two versions is good for anyone.

Having said that we lose by switching to SASS, I think stylus is underrated as it didn't have a popular CSS framework to boost its popularity yet, I still prefer it over SASS. I think we should all discuss this, ping @AsamyX

[ismail9k]

I want to make sure that we all on the same ground. SASS with A was introduced first, which syntax is more like Stylus syntax-style we are following (no Braces, no Semicolon, and Colon is mandatory), SCSS with C was created later by the same creator of SASS and it even depends on the same Ruby gem. SCSS is ideal for new developers and educational stuff since its syntax is like the original CSS.

It is worth mentioning here, that Bulma uses SASS while Bootstrap uses SCSS.

What I suggest here is to support SASS to widen our target audience, but we don't have to drop Stylus support, neither change our technology stack, especially that we agreed that Stylus has more advantages over the others pre-processors, but less marketing and less popularity. In my opinion, switching to another pre-process now will cost us a lot and will benefit us nothing.