121–130 of 243 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Using it wrong on every codebase that wasn't even made by me but instead by my employers? If it's happening that many times, the tool is to blame. There is no number here, you are basing this on your own experience and without any statistical analysis. Also no one really knows whether you or people you work with are genuinely trained and able to use the tools and/or program in a scalable, maintainable way. Therefor…
I assure you these aren't really small companies with no one knowledgeable about frontend coding standards. Insinuating that they're "using the tool wrong and therefore it doesn't work for them" doesn't do it any favors. If I see the same patterns everywhere and which even online people ran into the same troubles, I will blame the tool, absolutely. Tools are not dogmatic, they are meant for us to use. If we use them…
I'm not insinuating that those unknown entities that only you know of are using the tool wrong. I'm literally claiming that they are because being "not really small company" says absolutely nothing about the way their engineers do their job.
> If I see the same patterns everywhere
"everywhere" is, again, something that exists in your head only and no one else knows what "everywhere" is. Where is everywhere? Who exactly are the people who are running into these unknown troubles? Are they knowledgeable engineers? Do they understand underlying problem that the tool solves? I'd say that you are consuming resources which gather people who run into problems due to their lack of knowledge, such as stackoverflow.com so yes, the pattern you'll see is problems.
> I will blame the tool, absolutely
Because the tool needs to bridge the gap between what people understand and what they want to achieve, there's literally no responsibility on the human in this story. Great thinking, let's see how that plays out :)
> If we use them wrong, it is the tool that must change, not us.
If you want to achieve the goal, the easiest thing to change is you and not the world around you. But by all means, you do you, the only currency you'll effectively pay with is your invaluable and irreplaceable time.
> Must I only comment on the tool itself without anything in its periphery?
I didn't tell you what you *must*, I asked why you didn't. You still have the option to do so, but that would require that you actually invest time into checking out Konsta UI - which you didn't, right? Is my assumption correct? You just didn't do it but you commented on what you disliked. I think that's all there is to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And your Typescript CSS in JS thing using some new thing? TW is at least well documented and widely used and based on a fairly formalised bunch of classes that builds upon a concept that’s been used for 10+ years.
It's not my thing, I didn't make it, for one. Then just use CSS at that point, it's been here 20+ years then. I simply don't understand how it can be superior to regular CSS in any way simply because it maps one to one onto CSS properties anyway.
At work we switched over from SCSS modules+global styles to Tailwind last year and it has been great so far: 1. No more custom CSS. No need to think how to name your classes. No more unused CSS. 2. Code completion (VSCode plugin for TW classes) 3. Well documented. Even our BE developers are able to jump in and do minor changes.
The long CSS class name strings look funny but nobody complained about it in our team. Choose whatever works for your team. Tailwind has been nothing but a pleasure for us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you these aren't really small companies with no one knowledgeable about frontend coding standards. Insinuating that they're "using the tool wrong and therefore it doesn't work for them" doesn't do it any favors. If I see the same patterns everywhere and which even online people ran into the same troubles, I will blame the tool, absolutely. Tools are not dogmatic, they are meant for us to use. If we use them…
You can assure me with the might of 1000 exploding suns, but it STILL means nothing. I'm not insinuating that those unknown entities that only you know of are using the tool wrong. I'm literally claiming that they are because being "not really small company" says absolutely nothing about the way their engineers do their job. > If I see the same patterns everywhere "everywhere" is, again, something that exists in your…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The reality is that if the codebase and style code is in flux, that idealized CSS stylesheet will churn towards a being a mess of tech debt. Interesting. That’s not been my experience. People tend to clean up as they go, eg if the design says we now need a thinner padding / gaps or a different colour blue, we change the variable, and if we spot cut and pastes we fix them. It’s certainly much easier to refactor than…
What you describe is not representative of how CSS is maintained in most companies. You always end up in a situation where it's impossible to track down what styles affect what elements so you start overriding and duplicating because you're afraid to touch existing CSS.
Anyone notice all the gambling sponsors? Looks like they're fed from OpenCollective (see BACKERS.md in the github repo). Feels like they're trying to get backlinks as their URLs end up as anchor tags on the site Such a weird ecosystem the sponsorships have created. I see a lot of other sites with irrelevant sponsors and non-trivial amounts of money, there just for the SEO/ranking
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You mean the readability of "p-2 bg-red-500 text-lg font-medium" or "i-dont-remember-what-this-class-does" No, I'm pretty sure he means the readability of "absolute bottom-0 text-sm md:text-base text-white leading-relaxed tracking-tighter transition-all duration-300 ease-in-out m-3 md:m-4 px-6 md:px-8 py-4 md:py-6 opacity-0 w-full", as opposed to a single well-named class such as "image-caption".
Well at least I won't have to have 2 split windows just to know what 'image-caption' is and the tailwind class you wrote, perfectly readable and understandable. If long class names aren't your thing, then sure, use CSS, but I'd rather save time and have understandable code than maintain those CSS classes like "image-caption".
Hey SaaS'ers, this is how you showcase a product.
What is it about everyone using Tailwind? It inevitably becomes a mess in every codebase I've used it in; it's like Perl, a write only language. I just use Vanilla Extract (with their Sprinkles API) and call it a day, it uses TypeScript as the preprocessor language and then compiles it to raw CSS, similar to SCSS but without writing SCSS. https://vanilla-extract.style
Sometimes, write-only languages are okay. Landing pages, marketing materials that will be gone soon. Tailwind shines there. Web apps, not as much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Saying people use Tailwind because they don't know CSS well enough is simply untrue. I feel like you don't even want to understand why people actually like Tailwind. It's not like you arguing against it will make us stop using something we love.
Lots of examples of it online of people using Tailwind because they don't know CSS well enough, it's not even debatable when they themselves literally claim that's why they use it. Even in this thread there are people doing so: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34921960 I understand perfectly well why people like Tailwind. The problem is not initial productivity; indeed, I can write bash scripts too very quickly t…
The maintenance is what makes Tailwind awesome. I've written CSS professionally since Internet Explorer 6 and have gone through many different strategies for writing maintainable CSS (BEM, OOCSS, SCSS and multiple different CSS-in-JS methods) but Tailwind is the first time I actually feel relieved of all the issues. To me, it's such an enormous improvement from normal CSS that people arguing against it feels like someone trying to convince me not to use syntax highlighting.