4 ms·

It's kind of gatekeepy insisting on styled components being of lower quality than using pure CSS. Styled Components serves a specialized purpose of styling thin

It's kind of gatekeepy insisting on styled components being of lower quality than using pure CSS. Styled Components serves a specialized purpose of styling things on the web. Maybe less elegant or performant in some respect than pure CSS, but with trade offs that some development teams will happily take. I also hate the sentiment, that software development needs to adhere to some notion of purity or divine elegance. And yes, I'm using the word divine because people like the grandparent comment keep acting like CSS is the church. It may well be, for some, but there's a reason why CSS is getting new features continuously... Because it's not perfect for every purpose across every development department. Talking about this makes me sick.

rendall 5y ago
Use styled components if they suit your use case, by all means. But if that use case is We don't have to learn CSS because we can just not think about it with this nifty innovation then the use case is horrific.
- cuddlecake 5y ago
  Eh, I'd say it's a valid use case as any. Maybe someone just didn't have the time confidence or interest to learn CSS. Maybe it's as simple as doing what you want, doing what you can afford to do, etc. What I don't like is the negative framing of this choice. Bad things will be built, regardless of the underlying tools. Grandparent claimed that using Frameworks results in bad practices. I claim that shaming people and questioning their choices (whether they made them consciously or unconsciously) is a bad practice.
  - rendall 5y ago
    I dunno. Maybe. How about the practice of removing a test that fails? Literally, test fails, remove it, problem solved. Ship it. Sure there are build warnings, but CI isn't complaining, so..? Is that a valid use case? If your team member did that, you'd be cool-and-the-gang, easy-like-sunday-morning, shaming-is-the-real-shame?
    - cuddlecake 5y ago
      You're trying to reframe my argument in a bad way. I'm talking about people deciding to use a certain technology with tradeoffs. You're talking about people going against quality standards of a development team. And that's where I end the conversation, you bore me.
      - rendall 5y ago
        Not trying to reframe anything. Just trying to understand the bounds of your ease with team members making these decisions. I haven't been hostile to you or anyone who disagrees with me, by the way. Just trying to understand if and where I'm incorrect. Furthermore, I said what I said in reaction to someone disliking the idea of Svelte being able to use any javascript library at all because of the chaos and bad practice that represents. > You're talking about people going against quality standards of a development team. That's what I've been taking about this whole time

rendall 5y ago

Use styled components if they suit your use case, by all means. But if that use case is We don't have to learn CSS because we can just not think about it with this nifty innovation then the use case is horrific.

cuddlecake 5y ago
Eh, I'd say it's a valid use case as any. Maybe someone just didn't have the time confidence or interest to learn CSS. Maybe it's as simple as doing what you want, doing what you can afford to do, etc. What I don't like is the negative framing of this choice. Bad things will be built, regardless of the underlying tools. Grandparent claimed that using Frameworks results in bad practices. I claim that shaming people and questioning their choices (whether they made them consciously or unconsciously) is a bad practice.
- rendall 5y ago
  I dunno. Maybe. How about the practice of removing a test that fails? Literally, test fails, remove it, problem solved. Ship it. Sure there are build warnings, but CI isn't complaining, so..? Is that a valid use case? If your team member did that, you'd be cool-and-the-gang, easy-like-sunday-morning, shaming-is-the-real-shame?
  - cuddlecake 5y ago
    You're trying to reframe my argument in a bad way. I'm talking about people deciding to use a certain technology with tradeoffs. You're talking about people going against quality standards of a development team. And that's where I end the conversation, you bore me.
    - rendall 5y ago
      Not trying to reframe anything. Just trying to understand the bounds of your ease with team members making these decisions. I haven't been hostile to you or anyone who disagrees with me, by the way. Just trying to understand if and where I'm incorrect. Furthermore, I said what I said in reaction to someone disliking the idea of Svelte being able to use any javascript library at all because of the chaos and bad practice that represents. > You're talking about people going against quality standards of a development team. That's what I've been taking about this whole time