3 ms·
It won in composability, readability and simplicity, it's resulting code and power usage is larger.
by tmikaeld 3y ago
It won in composability, readability and simplicity, it's resulting code and power usage is larger.
- turbo_fart 3y agoWrong, it ships the lowest amount of CSS it can
- ponyous 3y agoThis is only 1 perspective (which is correct in most cases but not always). It can also produce massive HTML (not CSS) making it worse than pure CSS solution.
- tmikaeld 3y agoEven when used as expected, per-page, you end up with unnecessary html and css, because tailwind can't combine the classes used from other pages. For one to be able to use tailwind as efficiently as site-covering custom made CSS, you'd need to collect the HTML or CSS Classes for the whole site and compile the CSS from that, but tailwind is waaay too slow for that to even work - not to mention, node.js can't even handle that amount of classes in memory (4GB Default). I'm very well aware of this because I tried to make it as efficient as possible.
- rjknight 3y agoDevelopers get more expensive every year, and compute gets cheaper every year. This is a good trade-off to make!