I'm a big fan of Tailwind (tailwindcss.com/) - similar to Tachyons but better imo.
I'd recommend this video to anyone interested in why you should switch to utility-first CSS -> dotall.com/sessions/a-real-life-jo... (a talk given a couple months ago by a friend of mine).
I'm used to writing CSS using SCSS, mixins, and namespaced stored values, completely avoiding magic numbers.
The level of abstraction offered by TailwindCSS is very close to writing inline CSS, using "chunks" of properties vs. individual properties. With the drawback of having to learn a proprietary API.
I can see how it avoids the overhead of naming things but feels extremely verbose and repetitive to me.
Chunks of properties are way more composable than properties themselves. And the overhead of naming can be huge... Especially in a larger project. And changing the css in larger projects can be a nightmare, so it rarely gets changed and instead after each new feature a specific chunk of css gets added, leaving the rest of the css unchanged out of fear. Otoh sprinkling chunks in your html, i.e. building properties out of chunks, rarely forces you to write new css (which also means that your css won't grow). And finally with inline css you can't use media queries or pseudo classes and if you tried it it's way more verbose than a dozen of class names.
Auth With Twitter
Auth With GitHub
re: Tachyons, the best library you're not using. VIEW POST
FULL DISCUSSIONI'm a big fan of Tailwind (tailwindcss.com/) - similar to Tachyons but better imo.
I'd recommend this video to anyone interested in why you should switch to utility-first CSS -> dotall.com/sessions/a-real-life-jo... (a talk given a couple months ago by a friend of mine).
I'm used to writing CSS using SCSS, mixins, and namespaced stored values, completely avoiding magic numbers.
The level of abstraction offered by TailwindCSS is very close to writing inline CSS, using "chunks" of properties vs. individual properties. With the drawback of having to learn a proprietary API.
I can see how it avoids the overhead of naming things but feels extremely verbose and repetitive to me.
Chunks of properties are way more composable than properties themselves. And the overhead of naming can be huge... Especially in a larger project. And changing the css in larger projects can be a nightmare, so it rarely gets changed and instead after each new feature a specific chunk of css gets added, leaving the rest of the css unchanged out of fear. Otoh sprinkling chunks in your html, i.e. building properties out of chunks, rarely forces you to write new css (which also means that your css won't grow). And finally with inline css you can't use media queries or pseudo classes and if you tried it it's way more verbose than a dozen of class names.