jonathanreinink

Hey thanks for the heads up on this — fixed!

Yeah securitytrails.com was working for me, but went down about 10 mins ago.

Hey there! Author of Inertia.js here. Inertia.js isn't really comparable to these libraries.

The goal of the libraries you listed is to avoid writing JavaScript entirely (or as much as possible), pushing this work to the server. Inertia.js, on the other hand, embraces using client-side frameworks like Vue.js and React, striving to find a happy medium between classic server-side rendered apps and full-on single-page apps.

Inertia.js allows you to create fully client-side rendered single-page apps without the need for client-side routing or an API. It uses classic server-side routing and controllers instead, which makes it super approachable to those coming from a server-side framework like Rails, Laravel or Django.

Co-author of Tailwind CSS here. Prior to building Tailwind, I followed more traditional approaches to writing CSS, like BEM. In fact, I remember when BEM first came out, and people hated it too. I've worked on small projects, and very large projects. I recently rebuilt a large web app using Tailwind, and my resulting CSS was TINY. I use Tailwind in conjunction with Purge CSS. The resulting filesize was 8.1kb gzipped (42kb).

> Tailwind and the frameworks like it are absolutely terrible at scale.

My experience has been the opposite. BEM is terrible at scale. You write the CSS, but then never dare change it, because you have no idea of the consequences of those changes. Developers end up duplicating BEM components for their use case, because it's safe. Which just leads to more CSS code. It's also worth noting that we're seeing more and more large companies move to utility based CSS, including GitHub and Heroku.

Been following Phoenix for a while now. It looks amazing! One small complaint: the lack of code highlighting in the documentation really bugs me.