That said, I do love it though -- I have yet to dig into the CSS variables spec but I like that it offers near-bootstrap level functionality for a lot less size.
Compared to my usual go-to, https://purecss.io/ though, it's super duper heavy, a factor of 10. Then again, pure doesn't have as many nice-to-haves.
Also, I really like the height utilities... I find myself writing these two utility classes ALL the time:
Am I really the only one who want to use another font than sans-serif with Pure? I had to hard-override the font on so many places just because sans-serif had such high specificity already.
When it comes to css frameworks you're not supposed to override the styles. Most of them give you an option to customize the setup or can be modified easily by changing a few SASS variables.
While that might be true, I do take it as a dis-advantage that the frameworks can't be easily overridden. I can just imagine the wasted minutes now, setting a font on the page only to watch it not change and wondering why pure would pick such specificity only to set the font to sans-serif. Imagine if they'd done that with the other bits? Made the styling so specific that you couldn't easily style on top of it.
Also I believe that Pure doesn't do the whole configure-with-sass thing -- though it can be customized, it's CSS only (https://github.com/yahoo/pure).
I wasn't aware of this shortcoming of Pure (maybe because I haven't used so many custom fonts), but I'm going to be keeping it in mind for the future.
> css variables
> 32KB (unzipped)
That said, I do love it though -- I have yet to dig into the CSS variables spec but I like that it offers near-bootstrap level functionality for a lot less size.
Compared to my usual go-to, https://purecss.io/ though, it's super duper heavy, a factor of 10. Then again, pure doesn't have as many nice-to-haves.
Also, I really like the height utilities... I find myself writing these two utility classes ALL the time: