What is Bourbon?
What is Compass?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Bourbon?
What are the cons of using Compass?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
ReactQL is written in TypeScript to provide full types/Intellisense, and pick up hard-to-diagnose goofs that might later show up at runtime. React makes heavy use of Webpack 4 to handle transforming your code to an optimised client-side bundle, and in throws back just enough code needed for the initial render, while seamlessly handling
import statements asynchronously as needed, making the payload your user downloads ultimately much smaller than trying to do it by hand.
React Helmet was chosen to handle
<head> content, because it works universally, making it easy to throw back the correct
<title> and other tags on the initial render, as well as inject new tags for subsequent client-side views.
<style> tags when using #StyledComponents.
React Router handles routing, because it works both on the server and in the client. ReactQL customises it further by capturing non-200 responses on the server, redirecting or throwing back custom 404 pages as needed.
Koa is the web server that handles all incoming HTTP requests, because it's fast (TTFB < 5ms, even after fully rendering React), and its natively #async, making it easy to async/await inside routes and middleware.
We use Sass because I invented it! No, that's not a joke at all! Well, let me explain. So, we used Sass before I started at Rent the Runway because it's the de-facto industry standard for pre-compiled and pre-processed CSS. We do also use PostCSS for stuff like vendor prefixing and various transformations, but Sass (specifically SCSS) is the main developer-focused language for describing our styling. Some internal apps use styled-components and @Aphrodite, but our main website is allllll Sassy. Oh, but the non-joking part is the inventing part. /shrug
It was a little awkward building BS3 with LESS, and the rest of the site with SCSS, but it works. SCSS made building the UI elements (ink/flip buttons, img navs, etc) a breeze. It also drives the mobile menu open/close transitions - that would have been much too much with vanilla css.
Sass helps us write better stylesheets. One major improvement over CSS that we use a lot is variables - it allows for much easier theming to quickly change brand colors for new instances of the xCoLab.
When you realise that countless lines of CSS codes could be made countable. And off course, a wonderful and cool way to use the logic behind variables and nesting. Simply love it.
Sass is used as a part of Woltlab Suite Core, which offers to submit/configure own styles via the injection of own Sass-CSS. So we exclusively rely on Sass for our CSS needs.
CSS is a mess. There, we said it. Sass, on the other hand takes CSS and makes it pretty, easy to work with and has stuff like variables which make things seriously awesome.
Using Bourbon Neat for building a grid. It's easy to implement and is added to the CSS rather than the html which keeps similar modules looking the same.
Sass library that was originally used on the current JourneyMaker app. We've been slowly removing it from the front end.
[Free] We use this free Sass framework on just about any project that we work on.