undefined | Better HN

0 pointsspockz4mo ago0 comments

I really don’t understand this idea that seems to be prevalent to let the LLM generate everything from scratch instead of using existing battle tested frameworks. Be it for css or backend code.

Good modular design of software and separation of concern are still important for debugging and lifecycle. For (instructing) the llm it will also be easier if it uses frameworks as the resulting code of the project itself will remain smaller, reducing the context for both llm and human.

0 comments

spankalee4mo ago

CSS simply doesn't need a framework - there's no "from scratch". For humans or LLM authors.

Tailwind is a lot of overhead conceptually and tooling wise to just not have to write classnames, and it's actually anti-modular.

AltruisticGapHN4mo ago

That's not the full picture.

If you're a senior CSS developer you will invariably reach a point of using "object oriented CSS" which is where you combine classes to an effect.

At that point you're not far off Tailwind. TW just took it all the way.

vehemenz4mo ago

Can you explain? Tailwind massively reduces overhead for abstraction, classing, documentation, and maintenance.

wrs4mo ago

AFAICT, Tailwind is largely (not entirely) a different, shorter syntax for writing inline styles. (E.g., "class: 'bg-white'" = "style: 'background-color: white'".)

If you've rejected structural CSS to begin with, I sort of get the point that it saves a lot of typing; otherwise I don't see how it helps all that much over SASS or just modern plain CSS.

rvnx4mo ago

Tailwind is a dirty hack, normally you are supposed to declare a class, which you apply to items of the same concept. This is the cause for CSS to exist.

Front devs got lazy, and started writing for each element, position: absolute; left:3px, top:6px, color:red;...

You could write <font color="red">Hello</font> this would be similar "cleanliness"

1 more reply

baq4mo ago

Supply chain risk is real. Granted in CSS it’s probably less of a concern than in code, but it cannot be denied. LLMs make the proposition of supply chain reduction not irrational at the very least.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse