Styling Approaches
Choosing between CSS methodologies: Tailwind, CSS-in-JS, CSS Modules, and traditional CSS.
Quick Navigation: Tailwind • CSS-in-JS • CSS Modules • Comparison
The Styling Spectrum
- Utility-First: Tailwind CSS, Twind
- CSS-in-JS: Styled Components, Emotion, Panda CSS
- Scoped CSS: CSS Modules, Shadow DOM
- Traditional: Sass, BEM, Global CSS
Tailwind CSS
Utility-first CSS framework with predefined classes for rapid UI development.
Advantages
- ✓Rapid development: Build UIs without writing CSS
- ✓Small bundle: PurgeCSS removes unused styles
- ✓Design system: Built-in constraints and consistency
- ✓No naming: No BEM, no class name conflicts
- ✓Responsive: Easy breakpoint prefixes
Disadvantages
- ✗Verbose HTML: Long class strings
- ✗Learning curve: New class names to memorize
- ✗Build step: Requires compilation
- ✗Complex states: Pseudo-classes can be verbose
🎯 Best For:
Rapid prototyping, design systems, teams who prefer utility classes, new projects.
CSS-in-JS
Write CSS in JavaScript files. Includes Styled Components, Emotion, and newer zero-runtime options like Panda CSS.
Runtime CSS-in-JS (Styled Components, Emotion)
⚠️ Important Note: The library that popularized the CSS-in-JS approach, styled-components, is officially in maintenance mode as of early 2025. This means: No New Features - The library will not add new functionality. Limited Updates - Only critical bug fixes and security patches will be addressed. Ecosystem Shifts - The library will not adapt to modern React features like Server Components (RSC) without explicit 'use client' directives, as runtime CSS injection is slower than static extraction methods.
Pros
- ✓ Dynamic styles with props
- ✓ Scoped by default
- ✓ Colocated with components
- ✓ Full JS power (theming, logic)
Cons
- ✗ Runtime overhead
- ✗ Larger bundle size
- ✗ SSR complexity
- ✗ Not compatible with RSC
- ✗ styled-components in maintenance mode
Zero-Runtime (Panda CSS, Vanilla Extract)
Pros
- ✓ No runtime cost
- ✓ Type-safe styles
- ✓ Works with RSC
- ✓ Atomic CSS output
Cons
- ✗ Build step required
- ✗ Less dynamic styling
- ✗ Newer ecosystem
CSS Modules
Locally scoped CSS files that compile to unique class names.
Advantages
- ✓Scoped: No global namespace pollution
- ✓Standard CSS: Use any CSS feature
- ✓No runtime: Just CSS files
- ✓Works everywhere: Built into Next.js, CRA
Disadvantages
- ✗Separate files: CSS and JS not colocated
- ✗No dynamic: Can't use JS values directly
- ✗Composition: Composing styles is verbose
🎯 Best For:
Teams comfortable with CSS, projects needing zero runtime, SSR-first apps.
Comparison Table
| Aspect | Tailwind | CSS-in-JS | CSS Modules |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bundle Size | Small (purged) | Larger (runtime) | Small |
| Runtime Cost | None | Yes | None |
| RSC Compatible | Yes | Zero-runtime only | Yes |
| Dynamic Styles | Limited (cn()) | Full | CSS Variables |
| Learning Curve | Medium | Low | Low |
Best Practices
- 1.Pick one approach. Don't mix multiple styling solutions.
- 2.Use design tokens. CSS variables for consistent theming.
- 3.Consider RSC. Runtime CSS-in-JS doesn't work with Server Components.
- 4.Tailwind + shadcn/ui. Popular combo for rapid development.