undefined | Better HN

0 pointsEtheryte6y ago0 comments

You get all of those benefits without any of the downsides by using any other modern styling solution, for example scoped styles and scss. The arguments against this solution far outweigh the arguments for it. You're free to disagree, of course.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

adamwathan6y ago· 2 in thread

Scoped styles and SCSS do not prevent you from having to come up with unnecessary names for things like utilities do. That's the main benefit in my opinion. Wasting brain cycles to name arbitrary wrapper divs that only exist to be a target for layout styles things like ".image-card-content-wrapper" is a completely unnecessary step in the UI development process.

Using utility classes to build a UI is much more like building something with SwiftUI, where no one seems to argue about this silly "separation of concerns" thing we talk about on the web.

EtheryteOP6y ago

Using SCSS and using some utility classes isn't in any way mutually exclusive. If anything, it's a lot easier to mix and match. The argument isn't against having utility classes/mixins/extensions in general, but against relying on them solely.

I'm still not convinced — using only utility classes has very clear downsides, while using what's reasonably one of the most common approaches in the industry right now avoids those downsides while also providing additional benefits.

mattferderer6y ago

I don't think you can "only use utility classes". I think they cover 90%+ of your CSS though. I apologize if that came across as the argument I was making.

Yes, you probably will need to create some custom classes from time to time. Ideally those might be done in a utility fashion though.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse