You mean, "how about re-engineering the entire project for little benefit"? LESS vs SASS is one of the more infuriating "this vs that" argument circling the web right now, because everyone is so inexplicably vocal and passionate about it.

Looks like there is already a SASS port:

https://github.com/thomas-mcdonald/bootstrap-sass

The SASS ports tend to lag behind the original or don't leverage the full potential of SASS/Compass.

I personally think SASS has won out over LESS since the introduction of SCSS and if Bootstrap dropped support LESS would gradually fade away.

Won out in what sense? Last I checked there are no formal figures about usage for either. Bootstrap's phenomenal popularity ought to make it a kingmaker for the preprocessor it uses, I suspect.

Well, the CSS preprocessor ecosystem is a clusterfuck (pardon my french).

Since the differences are so marginal I wish projects would pick their preprocessor by the number of available implementations (in popular languages) rather than the latest fashion.

Less and stylus only have javascript impls and should be avoided for that reason alone. The same applies for most other niche processors.

Like it or not, SASS appears to be the only one with a C library that enables a wide range of language bindings.

In the Microsoft corner of the world, DotLess[1] is pretty popular, and way more mature than any SASS libraries in .NET.

[1] http://www.dotlesscss.org/

Recently I was investigating using LESS on windows. I didn't want to do it at run-time a la DotLess, but at build-time. I wasn't able to install node.js so i had to scout around for other options...

I came across this: https://github.com/duncansmart/less.js-windows

It leverages the fact that windows has long supported running JavaScript (OK technically "JScript") outside of the browser, without node, to create a command line utility from the less.js implementation. Works perfectly :)

I personally think no CSS preprocessor has won out over any other.

Negatory, but given the prominence of the ports and use of Sass, we'll likely try to do something here to help folks out who are using that over Less. No reason we couldn't write a script to translate the two or officially sanction a port. Both have their pros and cons; just a matter of time, duplicate code, etc.

that's awesome to hear.

Even if you don't officially sanction or provide a port yourself -- just hearing that you're open to tweaking the way you do things a bit to make it easier for _others_ to port to Sass (and keep their ports up to date with bootstrap evolution) -- is super encouraging.

I'd actually suggest that as a first step, just talk to the folks maintaining the ports, and ask if there's anything you can tweak on your end to make their jobs easier.

On significantly large projects, the compass compiler can take a lot more time than lessc. Eg. Sencha Touch's sass based styling.

does SASS work without installing the pre-processor? I know LESS does. I didn't think SASS did. LESS will work well enough with just the js file loaded (if a bit slower).

You still have to compile both.

You shouldn't be running less.js in production.

Interesting, I didn't know this, though in retrospect, it should be obvious, versus compilation.

:) I see what you did there....I also agree