3 ms·
I'd rather just use tailwind or other utility css. Why have another proprietary abstraction when you can have something concise that maps more directly to css.
by apineda 6y ago
I'd rather just use tailwind or other utility css. Why have another proprietary abstraction when you can have something concise that maps more directly to css. You can then build your own local abstractions as needed. Much leaner, universal and comprehensible imo.
- wokwokwok 6y agoCSS frameworks only solve the display side of things. Behaviour is as important, and it’s not trivial to implement. You’re writing a button? Well, big dealing you don’t need a component library. Modals? Menus? Tool tips? Autocomplete? Sliders? Colour pickers? I think it’s fair to say tailwind is a totally distinct problem domain, and not really relevant with regard to component frameworks.
- pdxandi 6y agoI totally agree with you. I will say though, Tailwind with React hooks and Zustand is my go to lately. Feels quite trivial and flexible to build the functionality you mentioned. I've been quite happy with the output. Chakra UI looks fantastic, however. I am just personally feeling Styled Component fatigue after a few years of using it. I like being able to create consistent presentation with just CSS classes and leveraging hooks for anything more complicated.
- discordance 6y agoBeen playing with HTMX (https://htmx.org/ https://htmx.org/) for the behavior side lately and that's been pretty good for simple things.