solid-docs VS Tailwind CSS

React has introduced measures like batching state updates, background concurrent rendering and memoization to tackle this. My opinion is that the best way to solve the problem is by improving their reactivity model. The app needs to be able to track the code that should be re-run on updating a given state variable and specifically update the UI corresponding to this update. Tools like solid.js and svelte work in this manner. It also eliminates the need for a virtual DOM and diffing.

Similarly to Promises/A+, this effort focuses on aligning the JavaScript ecosystem. If this alignment is successful, then a standard could emerge, based on that experience. Several framework authors are collaborating here on a common model which could back their reactivity core. The current draft is based on design input from the authors/maintainers of Angular, Bubble, Ember, FAST, MobX, Preact, Qwik, RxJS, Solid, Starbeam, Svelte, Vue, Wiz, and more…

Solid.js is a very performant web framework that shares some similarities with React. For example, both use JSX, utilizing the function-based approach to components, but instead of using Virtual DOM, it converts your code to vanilla JS. Still, it is more famous for its approach to fine-grained reactivity by utilizing signals, memos, and effects. Still, the signal is the simplest and most known primitive of Solid. They contain value along with their getter and setter functions, allowing the framework to observe and update the changes as needed in the exact location in the DOM, unlike React, which re-renders the whole component.

Two well-known JavaScript frameworks and libraries used for creating user interfaces are React.js and Solid.js. Solid.js, a lightweight reactive library, prioritizes fine-grained reactivity and efficient rendering through a reactive programming model. However, React.js, which was developed by Facebook, is well known for its declarative architecture based on components and its handling of the virtual DOM (Document Object Model). Different approaches to state management and reactivity set these tools apart, even though they both enable developers to create dynamic and interactive web apps.

Solid.js like Svelte is quite new when compared to React, Angular, and Vue however it might be that pocket Hercules we've all been ignoring because we are so addicted to other frameworks. Solid.js is an interesting framework that deserves to be a part of this discussion. Solid.js pioneered the concept of signals when other Javascript frameworks made reactivity and state management a nightmare for developers, a factor that has contributed to the growth of Solid. Solid.js is incredibly easy to adopt and it aims for a simpler syntax and learning curve compared to other frameworks. It emphasizes the use of pure Javascript functions and avoids concepts like hooks.

React Server Components are the poster child for that trend, but other frameworks such as Solid or Qwik rethink client-server interactions from the ground up.

If you aren't married to the react paradigm, I had a great time with solid.

Frontend : SolidJs.

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...).