shadcn/ui is great! But what if...

Рет қаралды 15,763

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 52

@timmyers9798 12 күн бұрын

Im pro dev, have used shadcn now on 2 big projects. I find it very useful. A really big advantage is the template components you get on import can be modified. You say this as if its a weakness.

@kieronwiltshire1701 3 ай бұрын

If you have an issue with a component, you can literally re-install the component via the cli, get the latest version and boom, you're good.

@dziamid 2 ай бұрын

Unless you've modified the code and boom your modifications are gone. And if you haven't - then what's the point of having the source code in your repo anyway?

@kieronwiltshire1701 2 ай бұрын

@@dziamid if you have an issue with a component you’ve modified, and you can’t fix it yourself that’s a skill issue bro

@illker. 2 ай бұрын

@@kieronwiltshire1701 agreed

@dev-vf5fm 3 күн бұрын

@@kieronwiltshire1701 you know that's what the video is pointing out. What you're doing is fixing the bugs Instead of building features for your project. Well, he said that it's up to you if you're still going to use shadcn

@kieronwiltshire1701 3 күн бұрын

@ yeah so don’t use it if you need to be hand held through your job. Simple.

@GatoNordico 6 ай бұрын

I think it depends on who’s the intended user. I would say shadcn is a great starting point for someone who wants to have the flexibility to modify their ui components. And as you highlighted this flexibility comes with a cost, which in this case is not monetary…

@trangcongthanh 4 ай бұрын

0:42 The ownership of the code is the best feature of shadcn/ui. I rather try to resolve the problem by myself than create issue, wait author/contributor verify the issue, fix it, then release it. I even created the PR to fix the bug, but it never got merge. Or got merge but never released. In the end of the day, I need to maintain a fork of the library by myself. Is it less work compare to maintain shadcn/ui components? 2:48 You can config the tsserver to ignore some pattern from auto/suggest import ("typescript.preferences.autoImportFileExcludePatterns": []) Yes, upgrade deps for long run project is always a pain.

@k-yo Ай бұрын

When libraries don't have the behaviour or style I want, it is also my problem to struggle customizing it to my needs. With shadcn I can change its source for customizing AND fixing bugs quick. Also, making wrapper components around its UI components, instead of always changing the source makes it easier to handle diff changes from new versions pulled. That is something that I would also recommend for more traditional UI libraries, because in the future when you want to change to another for whatever reason, you update only the wrapper components. Basically, build your own proto design system and have your future self thank you.

@MrPkmonster 6 ай бұрын

Hello, could your suggest alternative library instead of shadcn ? Thank you

@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx981 6 ай бұрын

nextui is good and it's an actual library. it has a premium side, but it's optional

@SirJagerYT 5 ай бұрын

DaisyUI

@hubcio2115 7 ай бұрын

The aforementioned arguments are valid, but imo they're just small caveats. One point about big codebases is a good thing to consider but shadcn is still better then a component library. What you trade off with shad you'll pay when fighting against a library or hacking it to do something that it was not designed to do.

@DevLeonardo 7 ай бұрын

Yeah, I agree with that. There are some tradeoff like everything but so far it seems they're better than the ones with other libraries/approaches.

@austincodes 6 ай бұрын

It sucks when a library takes you 90% of the way there to your solution. Then the last 10% is hell because you have to hack it into doing something it wasn't designed for. Breaking changes and updates are also a pain. I'd so much rather own my code

@bnssoftware3292 5 ай бұрын

@@austincodesTHIS! This is almost ALWAYS the case with third party libraries, paid or not. Always look great in the provided examples, but always fall short when actually trying to use them.

@chirkov 2 ай бұрын

You spend 8 minutes talking about the only bug in the shadcn. Every library has bugs. Shadcn and radix are written beautifully

@RafaelBelvederese Ай бұрын

so he shouldn't talk about it, just because it's written beautifully? how can shadcn be improved without criticism?

@cb73 4 ай бұрын

There are downsides but… compared to what?

@angstrom1058 6 ай бұрын

"Dependency Hell" Thanks for pointing this out.

@sid06 6 ай бұрын

Thanks for mentioning this, it has been very valuable for making my decision (I will stick with JoyUI).

@dziamid 2 ай бұрын

With Tailwind team all in on catalyst could be that the hype of owning UI component codebase is here to stay..

@austincodes 6 ай бұрын

If there is a problem with shadcn you can make a pull request. If you are using MUI are forced to fix a bunch of random breaking changes because you wanted a newer version for a single component or bug fix. MUI and things it are terrible

@nasko235679 4 ай бұрын

A lot of the components (or primitives whatever) also don't work together. Let's say you want to insert a DropdownMenu inside a NavigationMenu. Everything spazzes out and the component starts getting rerendered constantly. Yeah, it can be annoying and time-consuming to write your own components but after spending days trying to stitch up a dropdown multi-nested navigation from shadCN components and failing, I'd say I would've been better off doing it from scratch.

@dziamid 2 ай бұрын

Did you build from scratch in the end? Have you considered using radix primitives instead?

@nasko235679 2 ай бұрын

@@dziamid Radix primitives seem to work better, in one case I managed to make shadCN work, in another case I simply made the dropdown menu myself. But I think the issue with shadcn in general is that if you're trying to nest the same component inside itself they probably have their state variables named the same, so it's got 1 source for state and whenever you "open" one menu the other closes as it's changing the previous state.

@smithrockford-dv1nb 6 ай бұрын

The problem is that all other libraries (MUI, next-ui, etc) all look bad by comparison. Vercel has mastered the look, and shadcn/ui is the only one that looks close.

@salamandr4111 3 ай бұрын

nextui looks great imo

@viciousattackvideo 3 ай бұрын

Eh top examples I’ve seen look borderline brutal but willing to see more

@emmanuelxs6143 8 ай бұрын

I think we can come up with a solution

@anthonydattolo6297 7 ай бұрын

Can’t use it on react native

@wadoudazer6906 6 ай бұрын

What about solution , i hate the way chakra material and mantine works with classic css or css in js (emotion) i really like tailwind

@jamiuadeleye 5 ай бұрын

Tailwind also works well with mantine.

@Abioticodin2387 Ай бұрын

You can use Mantine with Tailwind when you use it as a headless UI

@s_the_first 4 ай бұрын

"if your component has a problem, it is... YOUR problem". Lol. You are correct. But this is a good thing. Funny tho...

@hakuna_matata_hakuna 6 ай бұрын

am now afraid of updaing the depndancies because all the radix ones wil update and something will bvreak . parkui better imo snec they only use ark ui which they also maintain , it also workswith solid ans sveltte

@marcelomagalhaes4508 Ай бұрын

First, if you can't fix component bugs, you shouldn't use shadcn. PERIOD. Go learn more and then use it

@clickadelic7681 Ай бұрын

All the examples you copy - you forget / don't show to run the CLI / install command before. That's why they are bugged in your video. IMO not a full / correct demonstration on how to use it.