inertia-laravel VS Tailwind CSS

This is (as far as I know) not documented and I had to dive into the sourcecode for both the inertia server runner and the Laravel command to start the server to understand what is going on. Here we go.

So here is a quick guide how to set up a new Rails 7 app using my favorite projects out there: Inertia and Svelte. You can also skip all this and download the endresult directly from here: https://github.com/buhrmi/rails7-starter

Might be interested in https://inertiajs.com/

Laravel Viltify is a heavily opinionated Laravel starter kit. It's intent is to seamlessly integrate Vue, Inertia.js, Laravel, TailwindCSS and Vuetify, so you don't waste your time learning how to do it and focus on writing your application, leaving setup behind.

Can't believe nobody recommended inertiajs here!

I would recommend InertiaJS for using Vue.js with Rails. It lets Rails continue to handle navigation so you don't have to replicate it client side. Same thing with views which gives you a very nice balance between an SPA and a fully server rendered app.

Now more than ever, it has become very easy to integrate React in your Laravel project, as opposed to before when one had to depend on APIs to connect the two stacks. This meant two different hosting environments and two Git repos to manage. But with InertiaJS we can build SPAs (single page apps) with your preferred front-end in one single project without need for APIs. Inertia has support for React, Vue or Svelte to use in your front-end. You pass data in your controllers as in any ordinary Laravel project, only difference is you're now rendering your views as JavaScript elements instead of blade. This can be done in two ways:

Awesome. I’m noticing a ton of “alternative” front end development tools these days: Hotwire, Stimulus Reflex, LiveView, Livewire, etc.

However I don’t think javascript is the fundamental blocker. When people say they dislike building SPAs, they probably mean they dislike APIs and the whole circus of double validations, error catching, form handling and cache invalidations that come with a React/Vue SPA.

Inertiajs[1] is a really solid middle ground of MVC goodness and client side interactivity.

[1] - https://inertiajs.com

Finally, for our front end, we’re going to be pairing Next.js with the great combination of TailwindCSS and shadcn/ui so we can focus on building the functionality of the app and let them handle making it look awesome!

You can use any frontend framework you want — react-based tooling, however, has a natural advantage as it models everything as a function of state, which can map 1:1 with the concept in Burr. In the demo app we use react, react-query, and tailwind, but we’ll be skipping over this largely (it is not central to the purpose of the post).

Tailwind CSS: A utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom designs.

First, you need to make sure that you have a working Tailwind CSS project…

Tailwind CSS

With better CSS approaches like TailwindCSS and Vanilla Extract (which we're heavily using) it's much easier to maintain the UI and make sure it doesn't change unexpectedly. No more conflicting CSS classes, much less CSS specificity issues and much less CSS code in general.

This app was built with Svelte Kit, Tailwind CSS, and many other technologies. For a full rundown, please visit the GitHub repository

Unlike Tailwind, which has over 77,000 stars on GitHub, Mojo CSS has about 200 stars on GitHub. But the Mojo CSS documentation is fairly good and you can find most of the information you’ll need there.

JavaScript React Flowbite Tailwind Firebase - Auth, Database, and Hosting Vite

- Performance is a feature.

Another common interpretation of brutalism is aesthetic, reacting to overly complicated user interfaces by creating simpler, more direct ones. Tailwind CSS (https://tailwindcss.com), one of today's most popular CSS libraries, promotes this approach in its component examples. There's also a neat library I've seen recently called "Neobrutalism Components" for React that I like (https://neobrutalism-components.vercel.app), providing components with a similar look and feel to Gumroad. This might more accurately be called 'Neo-Brutalism,' as noted in the comments.

A more engineering-centric interpretation of Brutalism focuses on form, structure, and efficiency, drawing significantly from brutalist architecture principles. Apart from the user interface itself, most mobile, desktop, and web applications are extremely bloated and often perform worse than sites from 10 years ago did. While one HTML file might be "less brutalist" than the original HN site, it is substantially more brutalist than any HN mobile app in existence, and offers nearly identical functionality.

A broader interpretation of brutalism, which could be termed 'Meta-Brutalism,' is embodied in the overall experience on this site through UX flows. Yes, in the strictest sense, the original HN site is more Brutalist in many ways, but it only shows 30 articles at a time and does not function as a PWA. For this site, the experience of reading 10 stories is arguably less brutalist, but for quickly browsing through several pages and skimming articles (which is how I read HN) it is a lot faster, and in my opinion, more Brutalist.

My primary inspiration was addressing software and tool bloat in UIs rather than strictly adhering to every principle set forth by David Bryant Copeland. I don't find it convincing that this site "isn't brutalist" compared to really any other experience apart from the Main HN site, and I would argue the overall experience is more brutalist in its performance and scrolling behavior.

As a side note: I generally don't like Brutalist architecture that much although I believe it is unfairly maligned. I visited the Salk Institute once and enjoyed it though (https://www.archdaily.com/61288/ad-classics-salk-institute-l...).