linaria VS stitches

The code duplication occurred due to disabling the default code splitting algorithm in Next.js. Previous developers used this approach to make Linaria work, which is designed to improve productivity. However, disabling code splitting led to a decrease in performance.

KumaUI : Another relatively new contender, Kuma uses zero runtime CSS-in-JS to create headless UI components which allows a lot of flexibility. It was heavily inspired by other zero runtime CSS-in-JS solutions such as PandaCSS, Vanilla Extract, and Linaria, as well as by Styled System, ChakraUI, and Native Base. ### Vue

I like Linaria [0] because your IDE typechecks your styles and gives you autocomplete/intellisense when typing styles. With Tailwind you have to look everything up in docs because it's all strings, not importable constants. Leads to a lot of bugs from typos that aren't a thing with type checked styles.

[0] https://github.com/callstack/linaria

And if you're wondering why I'm not using something like Linaria or some other runtime-less CSS-in-JS tool, it's simply because I don't want to have to spend my time setting things up and working around stuff and all that jazz. I just want something that works, and I've already got a personal scaffold for getting SC to work out of the box with Next, so, right now, it's either that or sticking to CSS/SCSS/SASS. For me, that is. I know it's such a small thing, but, honestly, one less headache for me is 2 steps forward.

I know that there are solutions that generate static css files (like vanilla-extract or linaria), but neither of them work with app router currently (1, 2).

If you really want tighter interaction with JS, try a zero-runtine solution like linaria

https://github.com/callstack/linaria is objectively the best. It's 100% styled component compatible, but with zero runtime which not only makes it substantially faster, but also makes it easy to do things like server side rendering, etc.

tags inside SFCs are typically injected as native </code> tags during development to support hot updates. <strong>For production they can be extracted and merged into a single CSS file.</strong></p> </blockquote> <p>There are also 3rd party CSS libs that do the same thing such as <a href="https://linaria.dev/">linaria</a>, <a href="https://vanilla-extract.style/">vanilla-extract</a>, and <a href="https://compiledcssinjs.com/">compiled CSS</a>. Which can be used in the event you're stuck with something that doesn't have baked in support via SFC formats (looking at you React).</p> <p>These are my preferred ways of handing it.</p> <ol> <li>Tailwind</li> </ol> <p>Option 2 is tailwind, which works backwards.</p> <p>That is, instead of the above with extraction where you write the styles, and the framework or libs extract them and replace them with class names, it's the other way around.</p> <p>You're writing class names first (which are essentially aggregated CSS property-values) which then generate and/or reference styles.</p> <p>It has the advantage of being easy to write (assuming you've got editor LSP, linting, etc), but as you've discovered, it's difficult to read / can get really messy really fast.</p> <p>As far as all the other claims on the Tailwind site, it's all marketing, at least 80% bullshit.</p> </div>

Over the past few years, I've worked with React apps utilising various CSS-in-JS libraries, starting with styled-components, transitioning through emotion, Theme UI, and finally Stitches. I've also integrated MUI, Mantine, and Chakra in numerous client projects.

Radix has some great ideas that challenge the way components are usually built. I'd love to use it, but am somewhat burned by how Stitches stopped being maintained due to the changes in React 18. Context: https://github.com/stitchesjs/stitches/discussions/1149#disc...

To be clear, it's not so much that they decided to not spend time, energy and money into maintaining it, but that there's seemingly been very little (if any) interest in letting others maintain it despite several people expressing interest. I'm sure it's scare handing over commit access, but if you're giving it up anyway then why not just do it, see what happens? Instead it's just dead in the water.

I'd happily pay license fees to use Radix and/or Stitches, if that guarantees maintenance. Sadly that's not an option it seems.

I work on a lot of more "creative" projects where frameworks like TailwindCSS or Bootstrap just don't cut it. My approach has always been to use some kind of library to ease the process of creating my own CSS framework that can then be used by other people. I find that Stitches does it pretty well. You set your design tokens, then you have IntelliSense to help people understand the design system.

Some libraries, such as Stitches, claim near-zero runtime performance overhead by tackling the first issue (parsing JavaScript CSS objects). Nevertheless, they still inject the parsed CSS into the DOM at runtime, which means they haven’t entirely eliminated the performance concerns.

Stitches allows you to map your design system

Define strict system of colors, spaces, etc then attempt to synchronize usage of it in both design and code (tools like https://vanilla-extract.style/ or https://stitches.dev/ can help with enforcing system on software side)

Curious to understand what is trending. We've been big fans of Stitches, however, unfortunately the project is no longer maintained.

There are some issues with SSR and NextJS in React 18: https://github.com/stitchesjs/stitches/issues/863

According to the docs, NextUI is a React UI library that allows you to make beautiful, modern, and fast websites/applications regardless of your design experience. It is created with React and Stitches, based on React Aria, and inspired by Vuesax.

Stitches CSS customization