css-modules VS Quasar Framework

One aspect of CSS modules that I truly appreciate is its ability to compress class names into very short hashes. This feature allows me to keep my CSS selectors as long and descriptive as needed, while still compressing them into concise three or four character hashes. It aligns with my rule for CSS: selectors should be written for human readability, but compressed for machine efficiency.

Use methodologies such as BEM, and technologies including CSS modules, CSS-in-JS, and Shadow DOM to isolate the styles of each micro-application and prevent conflicts, thus ensuring reliable encapsulation and modularity.

For many years, Culture Amp took the second option, and distributed shared components without compiled CSS. This meant that every app that consumed shared components needed to include the necessary CSS build tooling – at that time CSS Modules and node-sass – with a compatible version and configuration. This was relatively easy to set up, but over time proved difficult to maintain. When node-sass was deprecated in favour of (the much faster but slightly incompatible) Dart Sass, this demanded a difficult lock-step migration across all those codebases, which we have yet to achieve. And as new applications have switched to Tailwind for their own styles, they've had to continue to maintain those old build tools in parallel for the shared components' styles.

So CSS modules are a form of 3rd-party CSS-in-JS, where what you import are the class names, which are then usually obfuscated etc at compile time, and all the actual style declarations are (usually) compiled into a single css file or tag as part of the bundling process. You can read the og docs on'em here, and you've probably seen'em used in React like:

import styles from "./styles.css";

function Example(){
    return (
        

            Hello
        
    );
}

They predate the ability to import non-js files in vanilla by a good while, and rely on the compile process to translate your .css files into .js files that can be imported using whichever loader you use in your bundler.

Import assertions are a vanilla way to import non-js files by telling the browser how to import them; assert { type: "css" } says to treat the file as CSS and create a CSSStyleSheet, assert { type: "json" } says to treat the file as JSON and create a JSON object - and hopefully assert { type: "html" } will hopefully arrive soon and create a #document-fragment or something similar.

Hope that clears it up!

Extensions of CSS: for example, Sass, Less, Tailwind, CSS Modules, to make stuff look a certain way on your own.

The components are styled with CSS modules. When building the library, these styles will get transformed to normal CSS style sheets. This means that the consuming application will not even be required to support CSS modules. (In the future I want to extend this tutorial to use vanilla-extract instead.)

NextJS comes with built-in support for CSS Modules which allows you to scope your styles locally in individual components without worrying about name collisions or messing up other parts of the codebase.

CSS modules are not to be confused with mixins, as they serve the opposite purpose. While mixins are components or functions to be reused globally, modules are style sheets with a local scope used in a similar way as styled components in React.

CSS Modules CSS Modules is a pre-processing step: by default, styles are scoped locally to the current component, and the transpiler ensures no conflicts.

Today technology has taken over not only our planet, but also the planets around us and the universe. Man has been able to create technologies to explore other planets many light years from ours. And there's nothing better than using a framework called Quasar to create a project using Netlify's powerful features.

What does this bring that the Quasar framework doesn’t already? This sure looks like an ad for a barely preconfigured quasar template—but it’s impossible to tell.

https://quasar.dev/

I'm for Vue/Nuxt. While reading React code is fine, I found it easy to shoot myself in the foot (causing circular effects or getting no reactivity) in a way Vue didn't. Vue feels more explicit. I like React's TSX for embedding HTML, but Vue's splitting of model and view appeals to me. I'm torn on that one.

Vue's ecosystem isn't as big, but it's an established framework. Both React and Vue feel easier to work with than Angular. RxJS is really cool, but also very comprehensive, making it difficult to keep the entire API in mind. At least for me, who only use it casually (used to use it more while at Google.) And on top of that, I have to know the Angular API. Angular used to be great for Material Design, but I nowadays there are MD packages for all systems.

Nuxt is for Vue what Next is for React: SSR and SSG. It adds auto-imports, which is nice. At this point, I see no reason to use Vue alone, since there's always something that can be pre-rendered. Perhaps the frontpage, or help pages. Since Vue itself provides entrypoints for SSR, Nuxt is more of a file-structure based router that just simplifies things. The documentation is a bit sparse on e.g. the difference between a plugin and a module, and I usually resort to navigating their source to understand things. That might not be everyone's cup of tea.

If what you're writing is a web app, there is also Quasar, built on top of Vue. Similar to Nuxt in that it ties in directory structure, build system and MVC framework. It is also a Material Design UI widget library. Their selling point is that you can build mobile apps, and web apps with the same library. I.e. like React Native. I felt it strays too far away from the core simplicity of Vue, unlike Nuxt, but it's no doubt a very capable framework.

Finally, I'm currently using PrimeVue as the UI widget/theming library on top of Vue. It's okay. :\ Switched to it when the Vue Bootstrap project decided to to support Vue 3 (or whatever the situation was.) I haven't come across anything that's actively broken or missing. The companion library PrimeFlex provides layout CSS. Annoyingly, they've decided to close GitHub FRs, and some (far from all) bugs, and just keep track of them internally. Makes it more dificult to communicate, but I don't know their reasoning behind it (they didn't respond when I asked.)

* https://vuejs.org/

* https://nuxt.com/

* https://vitejs.dev/

* https://primevue.org/

* https://primeflex.org/

* https://quasar.dev/

3. Quasar Quasar is a versatile UI framework that allows you to build responsive websites, mobile apps, and desktop applications using a single codebase. It offers a wide range of components and utilities. Explore the Quasar website for more information.

My project is a quasar project that’s served on port 8080. However, I keep getting the following error in the log:

Quasar: It does not consider itself a library, but more of a framework. That, in my eyes is a bit confusing as it is based on Vue, but the idea is that you can use it to create websites and apps, meaning it uses a CLI to generate different outputs for web, mobile, desktop, SPA (Single Page Apps), SSR (Server Side Rendering), and more.

What did you download? Anything to do with this? https://quasar.dev/

I am an amateur developer and I use exclusively Vue and Quasar (https://quasar.dev/) as my framework. This is a big hammer and any frontend dev looks like a nail to me.

Quasar - https://quasar.dev/ - makes getting into an opinionated Vue setup painless