As an aside, this blog post originally started fairly focused on the story of our adoption of Styled Components, including going into some of the pain points we wanted to solve with that adoption, however the recent shift to drop Styled Components caused me to re-write a significant amount of the post.
At Wayfair we've recently started to shift how we approach authoring CSS for our web applications, and like most technology shifts across large companies, it's been an interesting journey.
I've been meaning to get around to this blog post for quite some time, I think my first earliest drafts for this were created around January in 2021. Since then I've shifted teams and mostly moved away from having a direct impact on the direction for our CSS approach, however I'm still relatively close enough to the work to hopefully have an interesting perspective on the topic.
To better set the stage I want to rewind a bit to around mid-2018 (yes, about 5 years ago at the time of publishing this post) the design systems team at Wayfair was essentially maintaining three separate component libraries. We supported a library meant for supporting our storefront experiences (those that you normally interact with when visiting one of our websites), another library for our suite of internal tools that mostly employees of the company used to do their jobs, and one other library to support the supplier side of things that suppliers selling their products on Wayfair directly interact with to manage their offerings on our e-commerce platform.
Additionally, at that time we were a team of 4-5 software engineers maintaining these three libraries, each library consisting of roughly 70 unique components!
However, the libraries supporting the internal and supplier experiences were essentially copies of one another besides the theming, the internal system used some different colors and a different font face than the supplier library but they otherwise would receive the same updates.
My teammate @roginfarrer was mostly focused on supporting both of these component libraries, and lobbied the rest of the team and our stakeholders to refactor and combine both of these libraries into a single library that could leverage dynamic theming to achieve the stylistic differences.
Prior to this we were leveraging SCSS with a relatively custom build setup, including a custom runtime bundler written in PHP paired with a custom transpiler that wrapped babel and node-sass.
We did some investigations into supporting a single library to be shared between both the internal and supplier use cases leveraging SCSS in a similar setup that we leveraged for our multiple brands across the storefront features, but we couldn't come up with a scalable approach that would integrate within our build tooling at the time.
Instead, we looked at the available tooling for styling at the time and the leaders in the space were Styled Components and Emotion. We ran some rough benchmarks, right around the time of the Styled Components v5 release, which was backed by React hooks and an overall performance improvement over what Emotion was capable of at the time. One of the main criteria that we evaluated during this investigation was support for dynamic theming, CSS Variables at the time weren't supported in all the browsers that we had to support unfortunately, so we opted to look at JS solutions.
We opted to invest in Styled Components, feeling comfortable on the performance aspects due to both how the current internal and supplier component libraries were used as well as the API similarities between Styled Components and Emotion - making a possible shift to the other framework in the future relatively easy.
The re-write from two component libraries to a single shared one took a while, partially because we were relatively short staffed at the time, but also we had many competing priorities and effectively had to re-write while still supporting the existing features and functionality.
I want to pause here and say that while many software re-write stories are horrific and usually result in failures, I'm still amazed at the work that Rogin and the rest of the team did to successfully implement this re-write all while continuing to support the existing code, and being able to roll out the changes with effectively no visible impact to the teams using the component libraries!
Around the time we wrapped up this large migration, the organizations internally that we were supporting were starting to shift towards having very similar needs. There were teams that had been asking for features from the storefront, e-commerce focused library, within their supplier facing application, and sometimes the other way around as well!
The timing was also pretty convenient since the org supporting our supplier features opted to do a fairly large re-design and as part of that landed on a pretty similar design language that our customer facing features had evolved to.
The design systems team decided to undertake the work to build support for the internal and supplier facing themes within a new library that was created as an evolution from our storefront library.
This work mostly kicked off at the beginning of 2021, building off of the successful adoption of Styled Components across what we called our Enterprise component library since mid-2018, we were eager to also begin to adopt it within our storefront component library. The timelines coincidentally aligned, so as part of supporting this new component library that we called the Core library, we began to adopt Styled Components across the new single library.
However, this is where we began to run into hiccups with the adoption. Our storefront experiences are rightfully held to a high bar for client side performance, including speed index and web vitals. As applications began to adopt new versions of the Core library, they reported concerning spikes in several of these metrics.
We had spent quite a bit of time working with application owners as well as our central performance team and ultimately settled on the main issue just being the additional runtime overhead that Styled Components added to our components.
We had always known about this performance issue, even since before we adopted the library for our Enterprise components, however we were optimistic that the impact wouldn't be as bad as we thought. Partially we were swayed into this optimistic thinking based on the various other large sites that had also adopted runtime CSS-in-JS solutions like Target, Nike, and the New York Times.
So our adoption of Styled Components was put on pause while we continued to follow up in some investigations, as a team it felt like there was no light at the end of the tunnel for our migration.
It wasn't until late 2021 and early 2022 that we finally felt like we identified a solid path forward for the component library and in general for our feature teams.
The key shift that we made was identifying a suitable compile-time CSS-in-JS library that offered the correct trade offs between developer experience while still optimizing for the end user experience of our website.
We looked at a few options, including a few runtime options, and even some fully static options, however we finally identified Vanilla Extract as the most suitable replacement for our needs.
There were many different aspects that we used to weigh our available options, but I'll say one of the main motivators for us at the time was us as a technology org deprecating support for IE entirely and moving to support only the main modern browser engines. This allowed us to more seriously consider CSS custom properties, which Vanilla Extract uses under the hood to support theming.
While we're still early in our adoption of Vanilla Extract, having only used it for about 2 years, I'm optimistic that it has set us on a path that still heavily optimizes both the end user experience without hampering the developer experience (and the same for the reverse as well)!
Along with some of this work we've also become eager to adopt newer features of React (Streaming, Server Side Suspense, and even Server Components), all of which would be effectively blocked or de-optimized if we doubled down on a runtime CSS-in-JS solution.