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

Ah yes, people are so unfair for having a mental model of "CSS-in-JS" that is informed by: 1. The seminal CSS-in-JS talk by vjeux who coined the phrase and showed a 100% runtime implementation. 2. Dominant implementations like Emotion and Styled Components.

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