Comment by toroszo
2 days ago
body { background: url('screenshot.png') no-repeat; background-size: 1791px 1000px; background-color: #000; position: relative; }
is this a joke?
2 days ago
body { background: url('screenshot.png') no-repeat; background-size: 1791px 1000px; background-color: #000; position: relative; }
is this a joke?
Please read the blog post!
I have, and I couldn't believe what it was saying and had to go see the code to verify. I'm really struggling to believe that anyone would consider this a "coding success".
Yeah, same. I thought it was saying it reproduced only the background due to not being able to figure out an offset due to a sloppy initial screenshot or something. Then I was wondering why all the link images looked fuzzy and tried to inspect them and also wondered why the links didn't line up with the buttons either with dev tools open.
On the plus side, it does somewhat explain the weird patterns in his diff image which I had been puzzling over.
> I'm really struggling to believe that anyone would consider this a "coding success".
The index_tiled.html version later in the article is what justifies the success claim IMO, and is the version I think it would've made more sense to host.
The currently hosted index.html just feels like a consequence of the author taking a scaled/compressed screenshot and asking Claude to produce an exact match.