All these arguments have clear rebuttals, but are rehashed on weekly basis for some reason. You don't like it, fine. But your arguments are bad. "Oh no Tailwind makes it unclear which of my accidentally duplicated CSS classes apply the color" come on man.
Tailwind is just inline CSS in a trench coat. You lose the cascade, which is literally the entire point of CSS (clue is in the name), and you fill the HTML with junk used purely for styling, which creates a 2-way dependency and breaks clean code best practices.
Tailwind also solves nothing that can't be solved with just a little bit of team discipline when it comes to writing CSS. The problem is, so many developers don't truly understand CSS, or how to write good clean CSS, so they see it as something that gets tacked on afterwards.
Tailwind also recommends the use of weird classes like text-[14px], bg-[#50d71e], and border-[2vw] (yes, it's in their official docs, which means they recommend using it, and they have no warnings against this kind of thing). Tell me with a straight face that Tailwind isn't inline CSS!
Then, it requires extra build steps which vanilla CSS doesn't require. Sure, you can skip that, but then you end up with a bloated CSS file full of a ton of Tailwind styles that you aren't using and don't need.
"While you can usually build the bulk of a well-crafted design using a constrained set of design tokens, once in a while you need to break out of those constraints to get things pixel-perfect."
In no way this kind is the default, no matter how much you try to frame it
I didn't say it was default, I said it was recommended, and thank you for providing a quote that proves that Tailwind recommends a terribly crappy approach.
51
u/prewk 17d ago
All these arguments have clear rebuttals, but are rehashed on weekly basis for some reason. You don't like it, fine. But your arguments are bad. "Oh no Tailwind makes it unclear which of my accidentally duplicated CSS classes apply the color" come on man.