@caerulemusic

I was a vanilla CSS purist and Tailwind hater up until the point I started writing CSS in a larger project. After many months, I looked at how my approach evolved and by the end I was just doing my own shittier version of Tailwind with my own shitty utilities and customizing schemes. That's how I came to see the light and understand WHY people made Tailwind. Now I love it and use it on every project because it offers a simple sane-defaults-out-of-the-box design system to work within the boundaries of and forces me to localize most of my style coupled to components - which might sound bad at first for reusability from a css standpoint, but actually it just forces you to focus on writing better, more reusable components. Not to mention, it significantly lowers the mental gymnastic barrier for team collaboration. Standardized approaches - no fear of breaking something 7 degrees removed. Don't have to try and stick to some arbitrary naming scheme that's up for interpretation. It really helped me to use shad cn and see the way tailwind is used in that library. It just makes sense. But I also think it's key to realize that a handful of CSS approaches can be used in conjunction for a nice overall solution. Tailwind covers the bases for most basic styling - then bring in other options as needed. I will say that one gripe is that it does take some time to learn the syntax which might feel silly if you already love vanilla CSS, but plugins greatly help and it's pretty intuitive once you understand the patterns it follows. The other gripe is that more complicated and intense CSS stuff translates pretty poorly into Tailwind or sometimes just feels impossible. But that's fine, and that's where you can easily draw the line.

@dissident1337

This doesn't make them not inline styles with extra steps. Removing stuff that isn't used is something that can be addressed with any sufficient Vite/Webpack configuration.

Moreover whatever benefits you're seeing in removing bloat from the generated CSS files is instead being moved into the markup, which, unlike referenced CSS files, is most likely not going to be cached. Whatever cuts you make to shrink the CSS output are going to be mitigated by delivering HTML elements with 20 utility classes each on every page load.

@Ian-zj1bu

What's new about reusing CSS classes?

@scott.adrian

Yeah I've been seeing a lot of tailwind hate on LinkedIn lately. People hate how it "complicates HTML readability". There are no silver bullet frameworks/systems for every website type, but I definitely can't understand the people that try to scare others away from efficient tools like tailwind.

@Nellak2011

Nice strawman. 
I am not a CSS purist, but good visuals though. 

I am more of a styled-components or emotion guy. The reason is simply I find it more semantic than trying to decipher Tailwind. 

If some teams prefer it then go ahead. 
However, I think that the bundle size is kind of irrelevant to your point. 

If you want to say Tailwind is good, you should focus on the software engineering metrics like Coupling, Readability, and other tradeoffs so people can decide on their own. 

Otherwise nice video.