I think he was referring to those instances where you have something which as far as you can tell at the moment should be a certain height but inexplicably (at the moment, because you need it fixed now!) has this weird margin underneath it. With a quick look at the web inspector and your code you can't work out where it's coming from so in the interests of fixing a problem now, you might `overflow-y:hidden` it with the intent to come back later.
It's not that overflow: hidden in itself is a hack, but it's application to counter collapsing due to floats. Already in the first paragraph, your link states that float containment is a side-effect.
While I do use it for this exact reason, it leaves a bit of an aftertaste. And when it comes to css, isn't that the definition of a hack?
I think he was merely saying that it is a hack in the instance where a proper fix, without using overflow: hidden, COULD be found but in order to fix it NOW it was required to be used.
Comments
Why is overflow hidden a hack?
I think he was referring to those instances where you have something which as far as you can tell at the moment should be a certain height but inexplicably (at the moment, because you need it fixed now!) has this weird margin underneath it. With a quick look at the web inspector and your code you can't work out where it's coming from so in the interests of fixing a problem now, you might `overflow-y:hidden` it with the intent to come back later.
He didn't say that it was bad by itself, but when used to hide something instead of fixing it:
> "overflow:hidden;" instead of working out what’s actually broken our layout
overflow: hidden; is not a hack. It can do a lot of things which in his opinion are hacks (wtf).
Suggested reading: http://colinaarts.com/articles/the-magic-of-overflow-hidden/
It's not that overflow: hidden in itself is a hack, but it's application to counter collapsing due to floats. Already in the first paragraph, your link states that float containment is a side-effect. While I do use it for this exact reason, it leaves a bit of an aftertaste. And when it comes to css, isn't that the definition of a hack?
I think he was merely saying that it is a hack in the instance where a proper fix, without using overflow: hidden, COULD be found but in order to fix it NOW it was required to be used.