3 ms·
LightningCSS[0] is better and faster, unless something has changed. https://lightningcss.dev/ https://lightningcss.dev/
by replete 2y ago
LightningCSS[0] is better and faster, unless something has changed.
https://lightningcss.dev/ https://lightningcss.dev/
- fallingsquirrel 2y agoWe tried LightningCSS and it gave buggy output for us because it doesn't keep track of property ordering. I wouldn't use it until that's fixed. https://github.com/parcel-bundler/lightningcss/issues/547 https://github.com/parcel-bundler/lightningcss/issues/547 https://github.com/parcel-bundler/lightningcss/issues/572 https://github.com/parcel-bundler/lightningcss/issues/572
- replete 2y agoUnfortunate to see these issues open for over a year, especially as previous versions did not do this. Thanks for the heads up
- GaggiX 2y agoJust seeing how bad the site renders on my phone I wouldn't trust it.
- ycombinatrix 2y agoLooks fine on my phone.
- GaggiX 2y agoOn my phone it has some extreme borders and in many lines it can only fit one single word.
- fenomas 2y agoTFA and GP are CSS minimizers - nothing to do with styles per se.
- muhrizqiardi 2y agoIt works fine for me--but I wonder if it has to do with the exessive shadow/glow effect?
- replete 2y agoI've used it on a few projects successfully. The property ordering thing mentioned in other comments though is good to be aware of. It's not difficult to switch out for css nano if that is the case. The important feature for me was being able to target a browserlist string and flatten CSS nesting