6 ms·

>This works okay in extremely componentized web apps. It's a nightmare if your UI isn't highly componentized. I've seen projects where you make a button by copy

>This works okay in extremely componentized web apps. It's a nightmare if your UI isn't highly componentized. I've seen projects where you make a button by copy pasting this ~80 character string of tailwind classes all over the place, and then changing the color names if you need to. Good luck fixing that when the designer decides that we don't want any buttons to have rounded corners anymore. That app is done wrong. If you are using the same styles to represent a button you should use postcss and do .myButtonClass { @extend: (80 tailwind classes here) }

markdown 5y ago
So now we have to add this new postcss thing. Modern web dev is bandaids all the way down.
- JasonCannon 5y ago
  postcss is literally how tailwind works. If you are using tailwind, you already have postcss. I get it, you don't like modern frameworks. Don't use it.
ggregoire 5y ago
Or make a Button component in your framework of choice. function Button = ({ children }) => <button className={80 tailwind classes here}>{children}</button> <Button>Create</Button> <Button>Edit</Button> // Same style <Button>Delete</Button> // Same style
- JasonCannon 5y ago
  Even then, I would still recommend using the postcss extend tag. Much easier to read that way. Also, postcss doesn't require any frameworks, you can still do everything with plain ol' html and javascript.
- montroser 5y ago
  No, we don't want all of the buttons to look identical. Some are big and some are small; some are bold and primary and some are muted and secondary; some have icons; some have shadows; some are disabled, etc, etc. It's easy to make them identical. The challenge is to be as flexible as necessary in a mature application, while minimizing verbosity and complexity. In my experience Tailwind hurts more than it helps here. It forces you to use your component system to abstract things which otherwise wouldn't warrant the extra level of indirection.
  - reactor 5y ago
    How would you have done it without TailWind? You'd still have to create classes for each of them in plain css anyway, except it would probably be in a different .css file. The inherent complexity pertaining to your app is not taken away, it just moved the places.
    - montroser 5y ago
      My point is that plain CSS is already good at this. So then you don't need to make more components with their own interface to learn. <button class="btn large shadow">Edit</button> .btn { ...default button styles } .btn.large { font-size: larger; } .btn.shadow { box-shadow: 0 0 8px #0004; }
      - iovrthoughtthis 5y ago
        but now to understand what a single class might do to an elements style i have to check for ever possible combination .e.g .btn.large {} .field.large {} .fieldgroup.large {} .title.large {} .link.large {} .large {} to find all the elements that the .field.large declaration impacts we need to enumerate all the elements that have both .field and .large in any order. we've coupled out html and css files
  - Adrig 5y ago
    You should look more into design systems. It's not only for Figma files but can structure your whole frontend. To extend on the example above, you can do something like : <Button variation="primary" size="large">Primary Button</Button> <Button variation="secondary" size="medium">Medium</Button> <Button variation="tertiary" size="small">Small</Button>
  - jbergens 5y ago
    If you a 100 different types of buttons I can see your problem, if it is more like 5 then you just create them first and then makes the code more DRY. For example when using React you can create 5 button components first and the refactor your code to make the 5 buttons use/call a generic button. Or have 2 generic buttons if the combinations are hard to handle. The thing with atomic CSS like Tailwind is that it very easy to quickly create a few different buttons.
pier25 5y ago
Doesn't that negate most of the benefits of using Tailwind in the first place?
- JasonCannon 5y ago
  Not at all. You design and iterate on the button using the individual classes, then you swap them out for a concise class once you are done. It's how tailwind is designed to be used. https://tailwindcss.com/docs/reusing-styles https://tailwindcss.com/docs/reusing-styles Although I realize in looking this up in the documentation to show you, it's actually @apply and not @extend you are supposed to use.
  - Toine 5y ago
    Using @apply is the ultimate last resort though.
jeremyjh 5y ago
Yes, there is a right way to do it. But in the code I've seen in the wild, people are often not doing it right and those 80 char strings of utility classes are on the low side compared to some of what I've seen. I'm skeptical of Tailwind not for its own sake but because a lot of (most?) shops do not have the discipline to use it effectively. And what you are arguing here is basically a no true Scotsman defense.
- rattray 5y ago
  I wonder if there's an ESLint rule out there to limit how many tailwind classes you throw onto one thing...

markdown 5y ago

So now we have to add this new postcss thing. Modern web dev is bandaids all the way down.

JasonCannon 5y ago
postcss is literally how tailwind works. If you are using tailwind, you already have postcss. I get it, you don't like modern frameworks. Don't use it.

ggregoire 5y ago

Or make a Button component in your framework of choice. function Button = ({ children }) => <button className={80 tailwind classes here}>{children}</button> <Button>Create</Button> <Button>Edit</Button> // Same style <Button>Delete</Button> // Same style

JasonCannon 5y ago
Even then, I would still recommend using the postcss extend tag. Much easier to read that way. Also, postcss doesn't require any frameworks, you can still do everything with plain ol' html and javascript.
montroser 5y ago
No, we don't want all of the buttons to look identical. Some are big and some are small; some are bold and primary and some are muted and secondary; some have icons; some have shadows; some are disabled, etc, etc. It's easy to make them identical. The challenge is to be as flexible as necessary in a mature application, while minimizing verbosity and complexity. In my experience Tailwind hurts more than it helps here. It forces you to use your component system to abstract things which otherwise wouldn't warrant the extra level of indirection.
- reactor 5y ago
  How would you have done it without TailWind? You'd still have to create classes for each of them in plain css anyway, except it would probably be in a different .css file. The inherent complexity pertaining to your app is not taken away, it just moved the places.
  - montroser 5y ago
    My point is that plain CSS is already good at this. So then you don't need to make more components with their own interface to learn. <button class="btn large shadow">Edit</button> .btn { ...default button styles } .btn.large { font-size: larger; } .btn.shadow { box-shadow: 0 0 8px #0004; }
    - iovrthoughtthis 5y ago
      but now to understand what a single class might do to an elements style i have to check for ever possible combination .e.g .btn.large {} .field.large {} .fieldgroup.large {} .title.large {} .link.large {} .large {} to find all the elements that the .field.large declaration impacts we need to enumerate all the elements that have both .field and .large in any order. we've coupled out html and css files
- Adrig 5y ago
  You should look more into design systems. It's not only for Figma files but can structure your whole frontend. To extend on the example above, you can do something like : <Button variation="primary" size="large">Primary Button</Button> <Button variation="secondary" size="medium">Medium</Button> <Button variation="tertiary" size="small">Small</Button>
- jbergens 5y ago
  If you a 100 different types of buttons I can see your problem, if it is more like 5 then you just create them first and then makes the code more DRY. For example when using React you can create 5 button components first and the refactor your code to make the 5 buttons use/call a generic button. Or have 2 generic buttons if the combinations are hard to handle. The thing with atomic CSS like Tailwind is that it very easy to quickly create a few different buttons.

pier25 5y ago

Doesn't that negate most of the benefits of using Tailwind in the first place?

JasonCannon 5y ago
Not at all. You design and iterate on the button using the individual classes, then you swap them out for a concise class once you are done. It's how tailwind is designed to be used. https://tailwindcss.com/docs/reusing-styles https://tailwindcss.com/docs/reusing-styles Although I realize in looking this up in the documentation to show you, it's actually @apply and not @extend you are supposed to use.
- Toine 5y ago
  Using @apply is the ultimate last resort though.

jeremyjh 5y ago

Yes, there is a right way to do it. But in the code I've seen in the wild, people are often not doing it right and those 80 char strings of utility classes are on the low side compared to some of what I've seen. I'm skeptical of Tailwind not for its own sake but because a lot of (most?) shops do not have the discipline to use it effectively. And what you are arguing here is basically a no true Scotsman defense.

rattray 5y ago
I wonder if there's an ESLint rule out there to limit how many tailwind classes you throw onto one thing...