[MattRix]

It’s a completely different approach from the normal way CSS is used. With Tailwind the classes describe what it should look like directly rather than what it is. Yes, it is still accomplished using CSS, but it’s definitely not the way most people use it.

[dreyfan]

Bootstrap and numerous other popular CSS frameworks, notably any with grid layout and/or utility classes, have done that for the past decade+. So Tailwind is the modern/popular CSS framework?

[y4mi]

No, they haven't. Tailwind is basically just a lot of utility classes which you use to set css values.

Other frameworks generally combine multiple properties with their classes.

It is a very different design choice with it's own up and downsides but equating it to bootstrap is just silly.

It's more realistic to compare it to directly setting style attributes on html tags then bootstrap, but that wouldn't let you use responsive modifiers/dark mode nor be as concise.

[addandsubtract]

Bootstrap has 98% of utility classes that you need for most projects. And if you use a design system or one of their themes, than the only 2% of css you have to modify is the color pallet and a few extra classes to cover edge cases.

Reinventing the wheel by subdividing all of your css into individual classes and combining them in html again just doesn't seem like a step forward to me.

[hbn]

> Bootstrap has 98% of utility classes that you need for most projects.

Including responsive classes? i.e. make this div X rem on mobile, Y rem on tablets, and Z rem on desktop? With 3 class attributes that require no config?

[nunodonato]

Yes

[alvarlagerlof]

Bootstrap also comes with a hole bunch of unnecessary components.