Mailchimp Pattern Library VS Processing

Here is a design system. While beautifully on-brand, as you click in, you get all the way to literal cut and paste code: https://adele.uxpin.com/audi-audi-ui Some less brandy examples: https://polaris.shopify.com/patterns/app-settings-layout https://ux.mailchimp.com/patterns/color Frameworks, like Tailwind or Material, are not design systems. - Source: Hacker News / about 1 year ago

Reply I disagree. There are so many creative tools that are now online that you can access from your browser that were not envisioned in the original web. It is obviously true that not EVERY website is about creation (but to expect that seems unreasonable?), but even Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Examples include products from big vendors like Adobe's Photoshop, to smaller products like SketchUp, to more... - Source: Hacker News / about 1 month ago

Would processing[0] be a good fit? It's designed to be easy to use and learn but powerful enough for professional use. Very quick to get cool stuff moving on a screen and the syntax is Java with a streamlined editing environment. [0] https://processing.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago

Processing? https://processing.org/ Or do you specifically mean mathematical diagrams and a DSL specifically for that? - Source: Hacker News / 4 months ago

I would personally use the language Processing. It's the one I use the most. And it's relatively easy to start drawing text, squares, and do other kinds of things. (It's kind of like java, but without all the boilerplate code). Source: 5 months ago

Processing (P5) had this: you can select any string of text in its IDE anl search for it in the docs, and if it's one of the built-in functions or constants it will open the associated static html page that came installed with the software, so no internet nor server required. And despite being offline you can still navigate the docs too. This feels a lost basic skill in static site generation these days. It was... - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago