Comment by e12e
2 years ago
> Tailwind would be a lot more appealing to me if it was coupled with some system where I could say "class X inherits from tailwind classes A, B and C"
How is that different from:
D {
@apply A B C;
}
Or creating a new utility?
https://tailwindcss.com/docs/adding-custom-styles#using-modi...
Note that the Tailwind team strongly anti-recommends @apply and regrets ever putting it in there. As for creating utility classes, well, those are still utility classes. If you do semantic classes then you are fighting against the philosophy of Tailwind as detailed in the Refactoring UI book.
> Note that the Tailwind team strongly anti-recommends @apply and regrets ever putting it in there
Please link to something that supports this claim, because it's not the first time I've seen it made on HN, but only found it on HN
It's accurate. Here you go: https://twitter.com/adamwathan/status/1559250403547652097?la...
https://twitter.com/adamwathan/status/1226511611592085504?la...
https://twitter.com/adamwathan/status/1296770370209566720?la...
1 reply →
There is a Twitter post saying putting it in was a mistaken and that he wouldn't do it again. https://twitter.com/adamwathan/status/1559250403547652097
I think "regrets putting it in there" is a bit strong - I'd be interested in a quote.
That said, the documentation does lean heavily away from @apply:
https://tailwindcss.com/docs/reusing-styles#extracting-class...
> If you’re going to use @apply, use it for very small, highly reusable things like buttons and form controls — and even then only if you’re not using a framework like React where a component would be a better choice.
Personally I think @apply is a useful tool - and I'm not sold on it being always evil.