[agos]

I've built a few small projects with it, and as much as I love the design tokens the idea of having a CSS class for every value of every possible property feels like abusing CSS, and it makes it feel like it has the same complexity of css

[Okawari]

It does feel radically different from the more traditional way of doing things, but I think it is for the better. I wouldn't call it abusing.

Tailwind together with view components has changed how I structure my code and it creates quite a bit less work than my company's old more BEM centric approach where we would create lots of tightly coupled CSS code controlled by variables and such. I find it easier to grok as well, because I don't need to reference SCSS files to determine the implications of applied classes when debugging or similar.

Now most of the component requirements can be codified in a few classes in our view component instead. Does it look kinda ugly, yeah sure. But I'm sure it has saved quite a few hours for me since I switched over.

This might just be because old process was even worse, regardless it has been a very positive change for me personally.

[withinboredom]

that's how I felt until my first `dark:text-white`. I got 'dark mode' out of the box and only needed to change a few things. I didn't need to google how to set up the css, then define a whole new dark mode. I was able to do iteratively, right on the component I was changing. This made 'more work' on the dev side, but on the testing side, you just had to find a single instance of the component and verify it looked reasonable.

I think the ability to mix up things like that is what makes it quite powerful. You don't have to go digging through your sources to find all instances of '.my-one-off-class-that-some-random-dev-also-used'.

[agloe_dreams]

Yes. It is intended to be equally complex, short of inheritance. But keep in mind that it doesn’t actually ship every class, it trims them out.