For me, it's just because SCSS just feels like a natural extension of CSS, so using bracket keeps that feeling.

For me, HAML and SASS are a pain to quickly read and understand. A lot of hierarchy is lost when you take out brackets and opening/closing tags.

It makes converting old projects to Sass easier, since any css file is a valid Scss file.

http://sassnotsass.com/

Wow, once I learned white space sensitivity dropping brackets and semicolons was the best thing ever. I would recommend trying SASS. If you are sticking with SCSS just because it is what you are used to you could be missing out on something that works even better for you. Now that I am comfortable with the syntax of SASS and Stylus going back to CSS is quite messy.

I prefer Sass over SCSS. It just makes more sense, it's very easy to read once you get a hang of the indenting. Less typing as well.

Example:

@include radius(10px);

vs

+radius(10px)

I've read a lot that people are moving on since it's the 'older' syntax. I would imagine its easier for those getting into preprocessors to use Scss since they can drop their normal CSS in, and start enhancing it from there.

I really like Sass. Much more simple. The indentation is strict and forces you to make it nice and clean. I gave it up for the same reason you're talking about. Everyone seems to be using Scss.

SCSS is now considered the main syntax for the language, per this post: http://thesassway.com/editorial/sass-vs-scss-which-syntax-is-better.

SCSS is also arguably better in that it's more expressive, among other things (see post).

That being said, I haven't used SASS in about two years, so I can't say I'm terribly familiar with what it's up to these days.

I'm a big fan of using SASS and HAML formatting because it is difficult, if not impossible, to make syntax errors. It also forces consistency.

That being said, I think that code examples are better off presented as SCSS since it is way easier for both camps to understand--the assumption being anyone using SASS would already be familiar with the CSS/SCSS syntax.

I use SASS. It's quicker.

Personally, I'm a huge fan of using pure SASS I find it easier to read and write but for larger teams, not using SASS could be part of trimming the on-boarding fat of new hires for some. When I was talking with Gumroad about joining the team, they were using LESS. I asked why and the reason was mostly related to that. It's very easy to move between CSS, LESS, and SCSS but pure SASS does take a moment to get used to.

My preference is to use the SCSS syntax because it so similar to plain CSS. My brain is already geared to scan CSS quickly. So, using SCSS syntax, being so similar to CSS, is just as easy. And with CSS4 moving in the direction it's going to provide similar functionality as SASS/LESS/etc., why not stay with the CSS syntax?

I personally prefer Sass' "old" syntax (without brackets and semicolons) since it's more succinct and fast to write in – nesting without brackets comes natural and the spaceship visual effect is at least attenuated. Plus, writing my JS in CoffeeScript makes the transition between the two languages even smoother.

Then again, it's just a matter of taste! :)

On a project of scale, SCSS (vs SASS) tends to be easier to collaborate in since vanilla CSS can compile in it. As a working example, when we built a style library at Trulia, it allowed different designers to jump in easier.

That being said, I have wrote my personal site's styles in SASS for fun.

I agree, if I do ever have to uses sass, I use the sass syntax. Mostly use stylus these days though, you can use brackets and semis or not (even intermixed) so a single syntax fits everyone's style. It also interops better with node, since the parser is in javascript. If anyone is interested I have quite a nice stack of libraries you can use with it as well.

SASS' author said SASS is considered the "old" syntax in a blog post. Most people I know use SCSS out of the box to avoid having to translate their code later from SASS to SCSS.

Interesting discussion, the main anti-SASS "argument" (apart from people being used to brackets) seems to be incompatibility with normal CSS, or that people are worried about consistent workflow across many developers or projects.

For me the normal CSS issue is never really a problem, I use CSS snippets all the time. Just a matter of removing the brackets and semi-colons and it's SASS.

Same goes for consistency, SASS isn't that different, anyone who knows SCSS will know SASS. A few missing characters is the only major difference.

I guess i'm in the minority :)

I don't understand how people can use SCSS or LESS, the markup is way to messy for me. Sass is the only way I work now.

I care quite a bit about maintainability and readability down the line. For me, using brackets and CSS-style notation makes things clearer to me and makes things a lot easier for other people to dip their toes into the Sass pool.

It also lets me integrate CSS very easily, which is a definite bonus.

MEEEE!!

I use and LOVE the Sass (the original) syntax!

I think it's more visually appealing to "scan" de code.

Is there a way to write your own functions in SASS? As far as I'm aware you can only do that using SCSS.

SASS here as well. I was using LESS for years before I discovered SASS and how clean it looks. I would've seen no point in switching over to Sass if I would've had to keep the brackets and semicolons.

It has the same problem that I have with coffeescript--the indent-sensitive syntax makes it hard to get a good grasp on complex hierarchies.

Honestly, I don't care what anyone working with me wants to use. If you're fluent in SASS, HAML, Jade, whatever. As long as the code you write is clear. Especially when it's super-easy to convert between SASS/SCSS as needed.

I prefer SCSS because it's like the regular CSS with superpowers.

Even though I prefer to remove brackets when using Stylus, I prefer the SCSS syntax with SASS. After a while I just don’t even think about them, other than knowing I have to put the in at sometime (with my editor doing most of that work for me).

So the argument that SASS feels cleaner is moot to me and kind of feels like the arguments people made for XHTML: “XHTML is better because it’s stricter!”, but why is that better?

I also write a lot of JavaScript and PHP and brackets are common-place when writing both. Although the argument can be made that indented-Sass requires less typing, brackets and semi-colons come a heck of a lot more naturally for me.

Brackets and semi-colons serve as good start-end indicators.

The trade off is @include mixin-name... as opposed to +mixin-name but it's a trade off that's worth it for me in the end, in spite of the extra typing.

I think it's more of a comfort thing. I use scss, and just asked myself why not sass because you asked :P

I use brackets because it's a natural extension of CSS. At work however, I'm required to forgo brackets.

I actually use SASS. I used to use SCSS, but got sick of using delimiters.

I'm with you Ib W.! I don't really know any of the pros/cons in comparison to SCSS, but I prefer no brackets and semi-colons. That's kind of my only reasoning, which I know isn't that great. Oh well!