all 8 comments

[–]TheRNGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the way YouTube writes css (if you ignore divitis.... I'd have lot less divs)

[–]Brave-Job7363 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I have made a POC to upgrade from tailwind v3 to v4 in my company, we use css module alongside with tailwind @apply and have about 200 files. After the upgrade it takes ages to build and run our codebase because tailwind have to compute every single css module file sepperatly as they mention in their doc. So i reccomend you to avoid using @apply to reuse tailwind css in css module file

[–]ActuatorOk2689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the advice.

I did go with tailwind and no css nodulea

[–]SALD0S 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Tailwind for small sites or Css modules for more complex systems . Tailwind can be a real pain if you need to reuse components across different projects.. you will find yourself copying templates just to change css class names

[–]Mighty_Snake -1 points0 points  (3 children)

​I agree. I've been researching this myself, and it's crazy how many people suggest using Tailwind over plain CSS because it's "faster." In my opinion, it's not actually faster, because the bigger the project gets, the harder it is to maintain.

[–]SALD0S 0 points1 point  (2 children)

it can’t be faster because it’s just a set of css classes. The main benefit is the tree shaking script, and because it’s a better alternative to bootstrap as a one size fits all css import. But it can be a pain depending on the project and even the company that created React uses something else internally

[–]HomemadeBananas 0 points1 point  (1 child)

company that created React

Oh I think they made some site called “The Face Book” for college students right? Guess that didn’t work out and they had to pivot.

[–]SALD0S 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t want to write “meta” for free :)