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

31–40 of 191 posts

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#31

Post by mstipetic »

TekMol wrote: post #21
mstipetic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because something is old doesn’t mean it’s correct, this is such a curmudgeon take. Things we have have evolved over a long time, have been started hastily (JavaScript) and there’s no reason to believe we’re not in a local minimum and something much better is out there. I personally believe the js model is completely wrong for the browser and something like an actor model would fit much better. I’m not saying we…

Evolution is very hard to beat. CSS is not static. It has been getting better and better all the time and keeps improving.

Yes because SCSS and various other new technologies have tried stuff out and we took the best back to CSS. No reason to think tailwind won’t influence css. For me it’s an improvement upon the style attribute which we have been neglecting and have been told not to use for some reason. I think it’s great to be able to adapt a component locally without putting a one off class somewhere which we have been doing before.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#32

Post by mcny »

TekMol wrote: post #19
nomilk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your analogy, wouldn't tailwind be more of a multivitamin, in that it contains a bunch CSS classes (vitamins) conveniently packaged and ready to go? I haven't used tw yet, but I intend to because I was blown away by how much sense the authors' book Refactoring UI made.

Taking multivitamins is usually the wrong approach. So they are indeed a kind of snake oil. Which condition do you intend to treat by taking multivitamins? Have you looked at randomized controlled studies and found that they support your idea that taking MVs has a positive effect on that condition? Have you got your bloodwork done? Did the doctor then suggest that based on your situation MVs are the right approach? I…

This was my experience as well. I talked to three different doctors in two different states and they were all lukewarm at best about multivitamins when I mentioned them. "It won't hurt anything" was about the best I got from one of them.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#33

Post by baq »

TekMol wrote: post #21
mstipetic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because something is old doesn’t mean it’s correct, this is such a curmudgeon take. Things we have have evolved over a long time, have been started hastily (JavaScript) and there’s no reason to believe we’re not in a local minimum and something much better is out there. I personally believe the js model is completely wrong for the browser and something like an actor model would fit much better. I’m not saying we…

Evolution is very hard to beat. CSS is not static. It has been getting better and better all the time and keeps improving.

there's evolution and there's insanity.

it only took ~20 years to get a working vertical align (which was available in HTML from basically day 1, might I add). similar for grid to be available and it still kinda sucks.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#34

Post by nomilk »

TekMol wrote: post #19
nomilk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your analogy, wouldn't tailwind be more of a multivitamin, in that it contains a bunch CSS classes (vitamins) conveniently packaged and ready to go? I haven't used tw yet, but I intend to because I was blown away by how much sense the authors' book Refactoring UI made.

Taking multivitamins is usually the wrong approach. So they are indeed a kind of snake oil. Which condition do you intend to treat by taking multivitamins? Have you looked at randomized controlled studies and found that they support your idea that taking MVs has a positive effect on that condition? Have you got your bloodwork done? Did the doctor then suggest that based on your situation MVs are the right approach? I…

Tailwind provides many classes to use right out of the box, whereas vanilla CSS requires classes to be written, which takes longer.

If someone's good at, fast at, and enjoys writing vanilla css, it might be the way to go, but if they don't have a sense of design or lack skill in writing CSS, a framework allows pages to look professional quickly.

A site made with a css framework may not be as extensible as one made with vanilla css, but if there's strong enough desire it could always be taken out and swapped for vanilla CSS.

For quickly getting things done on projects where time/resources are , I'd go for a frame work (for the reasons above: I lack a sense of design and would spend an eternity tinkering and doubting my design choices).

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#35

Post by PUSH_AX »

dbbk wrote: post #25
PUSH_AX wrote: post #10

I love tailwind. I strongly feel that most modern CSS solutions are massively overthought. In engineering we have bigger problems to solve than a key/value list that makes a div blue. Tailwind removes the thinking around CSS, naming, preprocessors etc etc, it just lets me write good CSS and focus on components and other engineering problems. I seem to be one of the few people who can read CSS properties horizontally…

Why not Styled Components? I've been using them for years now and I'm extremely productive. Tailwind on the other hand looks like a hellish nightmare, horizontal reading, proprietary syntax, no selector targeting of other components.

My personal opinion is that styled components creates an unnecessary and fuzzy extra abstraction on top of components.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#36

Post by mablopoule »

globular-toast wrote: post #17

Tailwind is an abomination. Of course it's easier to use. Pressing the bold button in MS Word is easier than setting up styles etc, but one makes it easy to create an impossible to maintain mess that could have been made by a primary schooler, and one makes it possible to create a consistent style that looks professional. The only reason I think Tailwind is becoming popular now is it's exposing a bunch of things like…

I really dislike tailwind too, but I think there is lot of value for lots of people in the idea of having all the styles contained with the template and thus making copy-pasting of code easier without having to deal with the pesky 'Cascade' part of CSS.

Personnaly, I love the cascading part when used correctly, along with the 'latest' evolution of CSS such as 'calc()', variables, on top of using CSS selectors.

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#38

Post by jack_riminton »

klysm wrote: post #26
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

Unfortunately it’s a little more complicated than locality of behavior because there is a trade off with duplication and consistency of behavior

Well sure, you can make anything as complicated as you want it to be

Re: Tailwind Isn't for Me

#39

Post by deanc »

The endless roundabout of discourse on which technology choice you should or shouldn’t make is exhausting. As a senior engineer im able to sift through the bullshit on this but as a junior I remember these discussions were draining and also made me feel like shit about decisions I’d made.

I guess it drills into a part of human nature where we are always measuring ourselves and our things against others.

Post reply on HN