Static Site Boilerplate VS Unused CSS finder

A better workflow for building modern static websites.

Crawl your website and find unused CSS

Performance
Static Site Boilerplate is known for its fast loading times since it serves static files, which can be delivered quickly from a CDN.
Security
Static sites have fewer attack vectors compared to dynamic sites, reducing vulnerabilities like SQL injection and server-side attacks.
Scalability
Static Site Boilerplate inherently supports high scalability because static files can be easily replicated on multiple servers.
Simplicity
The framework is straightforward and simple to use, making it accessible to developers who want to create fast and efficient websites with minimal configuration.
No Server-Side Dependency
Since the output is purely static files, there's no need for any backend infrastructure or server management.

Limited Dynamic Functionality
Static Site Boilerplate is not ideal for websites that require server-side processing or real-time dynamic content as it does not support traditional backend server logic.
Content Management
Managing and updating content can be more cumbersome without a content management system (CMS) integrated into the workflow.
Build Time
With large sites, the build process can become time-consuming, as regenerating static files for every change takes time.
Initial Setup Complexity
For beginners, the initial setup and understanding of static site generation tools might seem complex compared to using a CMS.
Limited Interactivity
While possible to enhance with JavaScript, static sites inherently don't support highly interactive elements natively without additional scripting.

Efficiency
Identifies unused CSS, resulting in cleaner and more efficient code. This can lead to improved page load times and reduced bandwidth usage.
Ease of Use
Provides a straightforward interface that allows users to quickly scan their websites and find unnecessary CSS without needing extensive technical knowledge.
Cost Savings
By eliminating unused CSS, it reduces the amount of data that needs to be transmitted and stored, potentially saving on hosting and bandwidth costs.
Improved Maintenance
With a reduction in CSS file size, future maintenance becomes easier and more manageable, making it simpler to update or refactor code.

False Positives
May incorrectly identify CSS as unused if the tool does not recognize dynamic changes or conditional loading, which can lead to accidental removal of necessary styles.
Dependency on External Tool
Relying on an external tool could present privacy and security concerns, especially when sharing potentially sensitive code and styling information.
Manual Verification
Requires manual verification of results to ensure important styles are not removed, which can be time-consuming and somewhat negate the tool's time savings.
Incompatibility with Complex Frameworks
Might not effectively handle complex CSS frameworks or preprocessors, where styles are used indirectly or dynamically through Javascript or server-side frameworks.