I''m experimenting with Tailwind right now, it's really not that bad, and their slightly different factoring of concepts is definitely more intuitive than CSS. But I wish it supported comments in classes; could just be a plugin that throws away its input.

My condolences, welcome to bootstrap 2.0

(doesn't it still use postcss)

:P

Wasn't tailwind commercial or smth? I just checked the playground a bit - it seems to have a class for everything so it's kinda like configuring the style property or so :P I don't need a CSS framework, GPT does my CSS. GPT does surprisingly basic CSS btw, not a lot of ninja stuff and that's fine because i'm not that advanced in CSS either, I make things work but a real designer would do Seppuku when he sees it.

@retoor Are you thinking of tailwind UI? That was also the reason I objected to it at work, but got overridden - IMHO CSS isn't that difficult to learn, it just a stack of rules. What all the rules are, that's a different story and which to me is the same as tailwind (except tailwind can't do some of the more complex selectors, for instance the ones I did for the sudoku)

There is also animate.css (https://animate.style/) if you want to do some fancy animations

@BordedDev I appreciate your sodoku stuff very much, I still have to do a more serious study on what you've written. I only researched your review points right now but didn't do in depth code reading yet. So much on my mind. I'm sure it'll be very educational. Having someone making a different version of your code is the coolest thing there is and it is unique study material. It's way better than just a review. Criticism that's backed with source example. It really deserves me taking proper time for it. Especially if it can up my CSS skills since mine is so outdated, a bit on purpose but I realized maybe too outdated. I have the privilege never writing at at work for years since I tell during interviews that I'm incapable writing smth beautiful so no one asks me. I do sell myself as full stack bevause bigger idiots with less skills do that and won't undersell myself. Rather upsell.

@BordedDev CSS is a transmission standard limited by both infinite backwards compatibility and the support of every major browser vendor. It has no namespacing, and its sole abstraction - the class - isn't even self-referential. More recent additions like layers and typed variables come close to substituting a legitimate abstraction mechanism, but I still wouldn't restrict myself to typing the actual network bytes when there are developer friendly tools that compile to it.

@BordedDev That being said, Scss combined with CSS modules seems to me thus far to be a much better language than Tailwind classes.

Clarification, a decent abstraction mechanism should be both self-referential and parametric, think functions. With CSS variables that you can set in the element styles, CSS classes are parametric although in the most painful way imaginable, but they're still not self-referential. Both Tailwind and Sass offer self-referential abstractions, but Tailwind strictly separates self-referential and parametric classes, and Sass' macros inflate bundle sizes. A usable abstraction could be implemented on top of any Turing-complete control flow, but instead of TC we have selector priorities which hide important decisions behind the most bizarre dispatch heuristic I've ever seen.

@lorentz I've skimmed through your reply, but will look properly after work. But wouldn't nested CSS https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US... take care of your namespace problem?

Also @property `@property" style="color: #54556e;">https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US...` ?... devrant broke, googling @ property css should have it come up though

@BordedDev Oh neat, @property got implemented everywhere, I didn't know that. One step closer to a a viable language. I guess I am being a bit overly cynical, progress is being made.

@lorentz Have you looked at CSS counters? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US...

Looks like nested CSS takes care of the self-referential stuff?

It has gotten a bunch of new features, and I'd usually bust out SASS but doubt I will now that nested CSS is standard in browsers

@BordedDev wow, what a good resource, ofc I know mdn but didn't see this page. I nest using > normally. See it nowhere mentioned. Its old?

@retoor > is the direct child selector,

.a {

.b {}

}

is equal to

.a .b { }

you'd have to do .a { & > .b {} } for the same behaviour