Post

It’s a real shame that folk a decade ago weren’t warning developers against utterly insane things like CSS-in-J —  oh.

People unfairly shit on CSS-in-JS when Linaria and Yak.js exist without any runtime overhead

If a library author uses a term historically associated with runtime execution, and shows people a syntax that looks like runtime execution (“but we have a special compiler that removes it, don't worry”), then turning around and calling people unfair for having the wrong idea is a bit cheeky.

It is impossible to have `-in-JS` in the ecosystem name and not create the impression of affecting runtime. And yet there are so many examples that are also `-in-JS` but leave almost no footprint on the browser's runtime or the bundle size

CSS-in-JS and styled-components are spelled differently enough to be considered distinct terms. Beyond the two I mentioned, there are even more libraries that are even more distinct and have histories dating back to the time CSS-in-JS was coined

Yes, it is unfair to extrapolate your experience with one library to the whole ecosystem. It's like when you tried React, it was slow, and then you promised yourself you would never touch frontend frameworks again and, from this point on, only interact with the DOM through native browser APIs