Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tailwind Isn't for Me

spicyweb.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 191 posts

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#141

Post by npteljes »

timeon wrote: post #94
jack_riminton wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Locality of Behaviour: "The behaviour of a unit of code should be as obvious as possible by looking only at that unit of code" https://htmx.org/essays/locality-of-behaviour/ Some people want "cleaner" and that's fine, I much prefer things to be "right there" as much as possible. Must be how my brain works

Also known as spaghetti code.

Spaghetti-ness is orthogonal to locality. You can have a clean god object, or a tangled abstraction. In my experience, neither invites spaghetti-ness more than the other. With less abstract code, you have less abstract spaghetti, and with more abstract code, you have more abstract spaghetti. And you can do both cleanly as well.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#142

Post by npteljes »

TekMol wrote: post #8

People want painkillers, not vitamins. That's why there is this endless flow of snake oil frameworks like Tailwind and all the others. People see some fancy demos and think "wow, so cool so easy" and "This is the newest framework, so it must be the best" and go for it. Then over time, they get caught in a web of problems that the complexity of the framework produces. Then a few people go for the vitamins route (plain…

And it's not even about what the developers want to do, often it's about what the clients want to hear. I believe in "boring tech" and I'm a late adopter as well, but many clients think of old, dated, outdated, deprecated, unperformant when they hear about a take like this. Often we need to do React just because that's what many clients think the modern UI does. And, in a way, there is a grain of truth to it: since it's also cool with many developers, it's easier to find developers on the market for it, should the project need new people.

With that said, your premise is correct. Prevention is uncool, and safety seems overbearing, preparation is met with "YAGNI". Until people need it.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#143

Post by jamiedumont »

mstipetic wrote: post #125
jamiedumont wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel we need a club for grumpy old men that yell at clouds! I'm only 34 but after 10 years doing this I now fully understand what my seniors were trying to teach me when I started. Boring technologies that work and will continue to work with the minimum of lock-in and fuss long into the future are what get me excited now.

I’m a bit older but I’m getting progressively more annoyed by this attitude of my peers, and increasingly think it’s an excuse not to learn new things. I know plenty people that are stuck in Python and are some middle mangers and just yell bah! at everything new. I’ve worked through the whole stack, am now heavily in elixir, work in a cutting edge LLM company and feel I’m better than I ever was. There’s a balance.

Agreed, balance is needed in every aspect of life. The conservatism of many experienced developers is likely an over-correction and the result of some scar tissue. There's always room for growth and trying new things, but with those lessons learnt in the back of your mind still.

I've shifted career and work as a photographer now, so remain ultra-conservative in my technology choices because I know I don't want to expend the time and mental energy to adopt over-complex solutions. It's less about how old/new they are, and more using the right tool for the job.

PS: Glad to see Elixir cropping up more and more. I loved using it before I changed careers, and still keep tabs on it. I've got an idea for a small API/service that might benefit my work, and unless I stumble upon a more appropriate choice, it'll likely be based on Phoenix.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#145

Post by cryptonym »

mstipetic wrote: post #125
jamiedumont wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel we need a club for grumpy old men that yell at clouds! I'm only 34 but after 10 years doing this I now fully understand what my seniors were trying to teach me when I started. Boring technologies that work and will continue to work with the minimum of lock-in and fuss long into the future are what get me excited now.

I’m a bit older but I’m getting progressively more annoyed by this attitude of my peers, and increasingly think it’s an excuse not to learn new things. I know plenty people that are stuck in Python and are some middle mangers and just yell bah! at everything new. I’ve worked through the whole stack, am now heavily in elixir, work in a cutting edge LLM company and feel I’m better than I ever was. There’s a balance.

In my job I have to learn about new Frameworks, shiny new way to do things and how they break existing workflows and architectures.

I like learning new things but the industry shouldn't follow latest trends for any project. https://boringtechnology.club/

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#146

Post by jamiedumont »

troupo wrote: post #131
gryzzly wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

google "html web components"

It's a nonsensical term for components with predefined markup and no Shadow DOM

So essentially what partials in a template or server-side include solve.

That's the only "build-like" part of my current website, but I'd much rather manage this beforehand and serve static HTML, or run a server-side process than use JS/HTML web components at runtime.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#147

Post by onion2k »

9dev wrote: post #139
dbbk wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Less verbose" I guess by a few characters... at the expense that you're not writing real CSS rules. So you're having to translate every rule into whatever Tailwind's syntax is for the same thing.

It's not the same thing, though. Tailwind applies rules from your design system, not plain CSS values. Assuming you're updating your corporate design to use border-radius 2 vs 4 everywhere, with Tailwind it's a matter of reconfiguring your design system configuration; with styled components (and other approaches) you're going on a string hunt.

Styled components are code. You could easily have a value from a central config rather than a string, like ${company.padding.px}.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#148

Post by gryzzly »

jamiedumont wrote: post #146
troupo wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a nonsensical term for components with predefined markup and no Shadow DOM

So essentially what partials in a template or server-side include solve. That's the only "build-like" part of my current website, but I'd much rather manage this beforehand and serve static HTML, or run a server-side process than use JS/HTML web components at runtime.

JS/HTML web components are the static HTML –

``` {your standard static html} ```

This is just a better way of doing DOM scripting, enhancing without waiting for Document Ready event, and having more freedom when to load the dynamic bits.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#149

Post by gryzzly »

karol wrote: post #144
gryzzly wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what about maintain a product? ship improvements and changes to the product?

If it makes money just throw more money at it. If it doesn't who cares?

hiring a person who will untangle your crap will cut into your bottom line – I think many people care.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#150

Post by 9dev »

onion2k wrote: post #147
9dev wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the same thing, though. Tailwind applies rules from your design system, not plain CSS values. Assuming you're updating your corporate design to use border-radius 2 vs 4 everywhere, with Tailwind it's a matter of reconfiguring your design system configuration; with styled components (and other approaches) you're going on a string hunt.

Styled components are code. You could easily have a value from a central config rather than a string, like ${company.padding.px}.

Sure. But now you need to maintain both places, you must think of units, and all the edge cases the Tailwind code base already handles.
Post reply on HN