[1dom]

It's a perfect representation of CSS: it looks and feels like it should do what you need, but it doesn't _technically_ do what it's supposed to do, so you spend a few hours _trying_ to make sense of it, falling back to just random fuzzing and trial and error, before concluding it's all broken and finally accepting it in its current wonky form, trusting that in some browser, somewhere, it works.

[bryanrasmussen]

I'm pretty good at handling the cascade and knowing how things work, so this experience you are describing is not mine where CSS is concerned, I doubt I've had to do several hours of trying to make sense of any CSS for probably 5-6 years.

As such that the game does not actually allow you to use the cascade as it should be used is a downside.

[1dom]

"I understand cascading and so I know it isn't what should be done with Cascading StyleSheets. It is right this tool to simulate CSS doesn't support CSS' nominative feature "

I'm glad we agree CSS is unintuitive on many unique and creative fronts.

[Devasta]

HTML -> JSX

CSS -> Tailwind

JS -> Typescript

It must be maddening working as a browser dev knowing that the very first thing most devs worth their corn do is immediately go to abstracts so they are able ignore your work as much as they can.

[whstl]

I feel however that trendy tech is moving closer to the browser.

Previously we had things like CoffeeScript, HAML, Pug, SASS/SCSS.

Tailwind is just plain CSS classes and the code generation step is just an optimisation.

For TS there is a proposal for adding type annotations to Javascript. Dunno how far it is, though.

JSX is the odd one out but still closer to HTML than things like HAML, which also had embedded logic but looked nothing like HTML.

[damnitbuilds]

C++ I can do.

CSS I leave to masochists.