Below are the top 10 RT'd tweets from the latest 1000 tweets made by @Hustle_Smarterr.

THREAD:

https://t.co/8EmLYHHbLo
https://t.co/aMyO7K3IbM
https://t.co/xv7QK5mdvD
https://t.co/Ww2s97Kw5x
https://t.co/tpylWLmMTJ
https://t.co/XEBpDNhB4A
https://t.co/5fvFdu0uwJ
https://t.co/9ncYALyB9P
https://t.co/VzO3RfnaUn
https://t.co/ZgAxL3UAvv
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Startups

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.