I’ve been using Pure.css whenever I need to use CSS, and love it:

  • It’s tiny (about 1/10th the size of Bootstrap).
  • It’s simple. Go-read-the-code simple.
  • It gets out of the way.
  • They release about twice a year, usually adding a single feature or so. Why move fast when slow is enough?

Back in the day, I used Twitter Bootstrap for the Tsumego Collections. It’s very heavy, there’s an infinite number of classes, one has to fit in within the framework very precisely for it to work, and it requires JavaScript for the menus (???).

The main drawback of Pure.css is its ungooglability and multitude of names. The web address is purecss.io, the logo says “Pure.css”, the page title says “Pure”, the left menu shows “PURE”. I honestly have no idea what the project name actually is.

← Thoughts on representing variations and commenting on them

No thoughts on “Pure.css”

Add your commentHow does this work?