411–420 of 559 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the things that tailwind achieves is let you ship style in a way that is encapsulated within components and works reliably across any framework (including server-side rendering frameworks, react, svelte etc).
That's not unique to tailwind.
Gray beard's 5c: Tailwind is a farce and a catastrophe. It's as modern as the style parameter is, and it's as reusable as a moving a dirt pile from one corner to the next. You're not learning anything valuable by learning Tailwind. Learn CSS, that will stick with you for the next 20 years. It amuses me when a library is implemented 'with tailwind', which means it's totally useless to the people _not using tailwind_,…
You're not learning anything valuable by learning Tailwind. Learn CSS, that will stick with you for the next 20 years. You can't use Tailwind without knowing (quite a lot of) CSS. There's nothing in Tailwind that makes CSS easier or that obfuscates the technical understanding you need to make things with CSS. If you want to make a horizontal flexbox layout knowing "display: flex; flex-direction: row; flex-wrap: wrap;…
Today's CSS - if anyone would take the time to actually learn it as they do JavaScript - doesn't need something like Tailwind to make it powerful, scalable and manageable.
I write plain CSS today, which is then scoped to components or bundles of interactivity, and all of those point to major, top-level control sheets that help determine the mode (light/dark/high contrast) and the theme. We tweak small changes up high to effect large platform changes throughout, saving time, energy and headache of the hunt/peck exercise.
I don't understand the statement "no one is going back to writing plain CSS" because plain CSS today _is complex_. It is a beast. But it is still "plain" CSS. Yes, it has evolved, it has grown, and it meets today's modern needs with excellent results.
CSS nesting is coming up soon: https://caniuse.com/css-nesting That will more than likely allow me to migrate any projects I have with Sass still in play, to remove Sass. One more dependency removed. Done.
So there's really no need for Tailwind if you know how to build with modern CSS - with the one caveat that if a project _already_ has Tailwind in it, it is a bear to work with/alongside.
That to me is the biggest con with Tailwind: it gets in your way when you don't need it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Five years? How about now. I saw a video a few months back featuring a VScode plugin to hide tailwind styles. If you have to use a plugin to manage your nuclear waste code by hiding most of it something is wrong.
Tailwind advocates don’t maintain their code, they just hop between companies and leave the disaster behind for someone else to deal with.
I love tailwind, and I've been writing CSS professionally since CSS2.1. I have often debated with many developer friends why it has performed so well, and this article really missed some big reasons: 1. It's works extremely well with the current component-focused UI frameworks (react, svelte, etc). Subsequently, the verboseness that is often a complaint isn't an issue at all, but a feature. 2. Does everything out of…
Gray beard's 5c: Tailwind is a farce and a catastrophe. It's as modern as the style parameter is, and it's as reusable as a moving a dirt pile from one corner to the next. You're not learning anything valuable by learning Tailwind. Learn CSS, that will stick with you for the next 20 years. It amuses me when a library is implemented 'with tailwind', which means it's totally useless to the people _not using tailwind_,…
You could not pay me enough to learn CSS. Every time I have to debug CSS there go many valuable hours of my life. With an insane amount of trial and error and judicious use of Chrome's dev tools I can usually hack some garbage together, until the next time I have to figure out how to remove the background of a button.
In the literal 90s I was building fully-featured GUI programs by dragging and dropping buttons and text boxes and inputs onto windows with Visual Basic, and the window resized nicely. Thirty years later I have to do the same thing with gazillions of arcane style sheets. It's a disaster. How did it get this way?
I never got how is "context switching" such a problem. I mean, can't you have like, two files opened side-by-side in different IDE panels? Is it really that hard to "look jump" from one another? This justifies the amount of overhead added by a library like this? If I can be blunt: I find this "argument" to be lazy as **. Sorry but "context switching" is just a fancy name for "having two files opened at the same time"…
It's worse than that. Tailwind imposes a ton of context switching by putting the style inline with you data. It's just that this switching happens when working on the data, instead of on the style.
You mean you have to think about how the data you're styling looks while actually looking at the data you're styling? Sounds terrible. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has been my general opinion on Tailwinds all along. When it first came out I thought it was kinda harmless, it's basically like some of the utility classes that always inevitably get made/used and that's great. But this idea that all styling should be done in HTML is antithetical to the whole reason CSS came to be in the first place, IMO. I can see why people like it to an extent, but I just don't really get the…
I stayed away from Tailwind for the exact reasons you described until i joined a company that used it heavily and now I really see the value of it. I’m weary of new tools and cargo cult but Tailwind won me over. It really shines for apps that are changing rapidly and are at risk for generating dead CSS, which has been a problem in pretty much every commercial codebase I’ve ever worked on. Tailwind adds a simple, stra…
I never try to be dogmatic about new things - so I'd try it again. I just haven't seen the benefits yet myself and so default to the cons I expressed earlier.
Gray beard's 5c: Tailwind is a farce and a catastrophe. It's as modern as the style parameter is, and it's as reusable as a moving a dirt pile from one corner to the next. You're not learning anything valuable by learning Tailwind. Learn CSS, that will stick with you for the next 20 years. It amuses me when a library is implemented 'with tailwind', which means it's totally useless to the people _not using tailwind_,…
I'll take this anecdote and counter it with the success of Bootstrap. You could have been using it for an entire decade now. There's a robust ecosystem around it to this day. Tailwind as the "new bootstrap" makes a decent amount of sense. These frameworks aren't an excuse to ignore and misunderstand the underlying technology. It's worth understanding CSS, but these abstractions can really speed up development time, e…
What do you mean? Bootstrap has not been affiliated with Twitter for more than a decade.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, sure. But that's not what you were saying in the comment I responded to.
Because you moved the goalposts. First you said that it “almost never” happens, then that it “won't actually happen”.
I find Tailwind's claim that you can "build modern websites without ever leaving your HTML" to not be entirely correct. Instead of context switching from my `.html` to a `.scss` file, I just end up context switching to their documentation website to find the syntax they used. It's internally inconsistent, so you can't guess what the Tailwind class name is for styling, while you can do this for CSS on the majority of…
It's the minor inconsistencies that prevented me from using Tailwind on any serious projects. I've never been able to get past their choice to use text-{color} instead of font-{color}.