←back to thread

Tailwind CSS v4.0 Beta 1

(tailwindcss.com)
159 points creativedg | 10 comments | 22 Nov 24 02:12 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
notRobot ◴[22 Nov 24 06:28 UTC] No.42211600[source]▶
I've never had as much fun doing front-end web stuff as I've had since I've picked up tailwind.
replies(6): >>42211697 #>>42211814 #>>42211834 #>>42211987 #>>42212105 #>>42212384 #
yieldcrv ◴[22 Nov 24 06:55 UTC] No.42211697[source]▶
this is the honeymoon phase, wait until your package manager and transpiler is out of date, and your progressive web app framework is out of date, and your typescript version isnt compatible with the upgrade yet, and tailwinds isnt either or it is but none of the documentation is yet, but you have to upgrade because your CI/CD cant run your version of node anymore

and now you have 100 flags across 5 configuration files and dont know which one to change to make everything work, but changing it might break the ability for a random dependency to compile, and even if you get that to work it turns out your project doesnt render anymore

replies(5): >>42211781 #>>42211843 #>>42212222 #>>42212337 #>>42214641 #
1. quantadev ◴[22 Nov 24 07:15 UTC] No.42211781[source]▶
Good rant! That's kind of what web-development seems like sometimes. Almost every part of the technology stack is there to fix some other part of the stack that never was ideal to begin with. TypeScript being the best example. It only exists because JavaScript sucks, and JavaScript only ever existed because in 1994ish some guy failed to get Java to run in the browser, and the only reason we're building apps in what was originally a "Document Rendering" system (HTML) was also not by design either but just an accident of history. One train wreck after another.
replies(2): >>42211940 #>>42212578 #
2. ◴[22 Nov 24 07:52 UTC] No.42211940[source]▶
3. agos ◴[22 Nov 24 10:16 UTC] No.42212578[source]▶
no, it's not a good rant. this is the billionth "web dev is too complicated!" rant that is present under every. single. thread. about any technology vaguely related to front end development.
replies(4): >>42213093 #>>42213095 #>>42215149 #>>42216233 #
4. ◴[22 Nov 24 11:57 UTC] No.42213093[source]▶
5. phist_mcgee ◴[22 Nov 24 11:57 UTC] No.42213095[source]▶
This site leans heavily backend it seems. There's a strain of patent smugness that comes with a lot of comments about frontend on this site and it's quite disheartening to see it.

You rarely see frontend devs disparaging backend devs for their tech choices.

replies(1): >>42216664 #
6. lucsky ◴[22 Nov 24 16:27 UTC] No.42215149[source]▶
I haven't yet reached the end of the comments, but I'm also fully expecting at least one "Electron is a cancer that is eating my computer and the reason why my wife left me".
7. quantadev ◴[22 Nov 24 18:33 UTC] No.42216233[source]▶
I just started HN a few months ago, so I haven't been around long enough to realize there's certain topics the HN aficionados have grown bored with. My apologies for the disruption.
8. quantadev ◴[22 Nov 24 19:25 UTC] No.42216664{3}[source]▶
I think back-end development is a much more "comfortable" lifestyle (I'm full stack myself), even if lots of it is technically more difficult coding than front end (i.e. multiple threads, databases, load-balancing, etc), because there's a new front end technology that comes out every couple of years, making many of the front end tech stacks become obsolete rather fast and they're super fragmented in terms of large numbers of different and unique frameworks. Not to mention how plagued front end work was for so many years due browser incompatibility issues.

For example, on the back end in Java there's been just basically SpringBoot for a decade, and as long as you keep up with it's minor changes you're all set.

replies(1): >>42217465 #
9. phist_mcgee ◴[22 Nov 24 21:22 UTC] No.42217465{4}[source]▶
I get where you’re coming from, but I think it oversimplifies the challenges front-end developers face, and it feels a bit dismissive of their expertise. Front-end development isn’t just about chasing frameworks—it’s about crafting intuitive, performant, and accessible user experiences in a landscape that’s constantly evolving to meet user needs.

Backend stability has its advantages, but the rapid evolution on the front end reflects a response to real-world challenges—like improving developer ergonomics, addressing accessibility, or enhancing performance. Front-end devs often have to bridge the gap between design, user needs, and tech constraints in ways backend systems rarely have

In the end, the fragmentation you see in front-end frameworks is a strength. It’s not “easier” or “harder”—just different kinds of challenges. Both disciplines are vital, and dismissing one does a disservice to the teams and individuals who keep these systems working in harmony.

replies(1): >>42217950 #
10. quantadev ◴[22 Nov 24 22:40 UTC] No.42217950{5}[source]▶
Sorry, but no, it's not "dismissive" or a "disservice" to say which things I found harder in my 35yrs experience.

I also say C++ is "harder" than Java, and that's not "dismissive" of Java devs. lol. I AM a Java dev. I did C++ for 10 years followed by Java for 25 yrs after that, so I feel justified to have opinions. I could tell you "Assembly Language" was hardest of all but I won't because it's "dismissive" of 99.999990% of humanity. lol.