Isn't Tailwind easy to understand when you look at the codebase, rather than putting in more effort to learn a pure CSS codebase? Isn't that part of the argument of Tailwind being easier to scale?

▲

JimDabell 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Isn't Tailwind easy to understand when you look at the codebase, rather than putting in more effort to learn a pure CSS codebase?

No, I don’t think that’s the case at all.

▲

reaperducer 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn't that part of the argument of Tailwind being easier to scale?

I think that was true at the beginning. But Tailwind is quickly approaching the multi-headed hydra it was trying to replace.

	▲	9dev an hour ago \| parent [-]
		What exactly has changed about Tailwind in, like, years? There are a few more properties for new CSS features, a few convenience features (like size-x instead of w-x h-x for the same values of x), but other than that? If you've grown accustomed to the utility classes eight years ago, then disappeared under a rock until today, you should be able to continue working in an unrelated, Tailwind-using project immediately.