看一看 1. 萨斯 2. 指南针

我所见过的对抗CSS膨胀的最好方法是使用面向对象的CSS原则。

甚至还有一个非常好的OOCSS框架。

一些意识形态与上面的答案相悖，但一旦你知道如何以面向对象的方式构建CSS，你就会发现它实际上有助于保持代码的精简和平均。

这里的关键是在你的网站中识别“对象”或构建块模式，并使用它们进行架构。

Facebook聘请了OOCSS的创建者Nicole Sullivan，以节省大量的前端代码(HTML / CSS)。是的，你实际上可以得到节省，不仅在你的CSS，但在你的HTML太，这是由它的声音，是非常有可能为你，因为你提到转换一个基于表格的布局到很多div的

另一个很好的方法在某些方面与OOCSS类似，就是从一开始就计划和编写可伸缩和模块化的CSS。Jonathan Snook写了一本关于SMACSS的书/电子书——CSS的可伸缩和模块化架构

让我给你介绍一些链接: 海量CSS的5个错误-(视频) 海量CSS的5个错误(幻灯片) CSS膨胀-(幻灯片)

这里有一些很棒的材料，有些人已经花了很多时间来回答这个问题，但是当涉及到单独或单独的样式表时，我会使用单独的文件进行开发，然后在部署时将所有在站点上使用的通用css合并到一个文件中。

这样你可以两全其美，提高性能(从浏览器请求的HTTP请求更少)，并在开发时分离代码关注点。

我发现最难的事情是将网站所需的设计转化为一系列规则。如果站点的设计清晰且基于规则，那么你的类名和CSS结构就可以由此而来。但是，如果人们随着时间的推移，随机地在网站上添加一些没有多大意义的内容，那么在CSS中就没有太多办法了。

我倾向于这样组织我的CSS文件:

CSS reset, based on Eric Meyer’s. (Because otherwise I find that, for most elements, I’ve got at least one or two rules that are just resetting default browser styles — most of my lists don’t look like the default HTML style for lists, for example.) Grid system CSS, if the site calls for it. (I base mine on 960.gs) Styles for components that appear on every page (headers, footers, etc) Styles for components that are used in various places across the site Styles that are only relevant on individual pages

如你所见，这主要取决于网站的设计。如果设计清晰有条理，你的CSS也可以做到。如果不是，你就完蛋了。

合理CSS的核心原则，摘自CSS重构:从仅追加到模块化CSS

Write in SASS. You'd be insane to forego the advantages of variables, mixins, and so on. Never use an HTML ID for styling; always use classes. HTML IDs, when used correctly, appear only once in the whole page, which is the complete opposite of re-usability — one of the most basic goods in sensible engineering. Moreover, it's really hard to override selectors containing IDs and often the only way to overpower one HTML ID is to create another ID, causing IDs to propagate in the codebase like the pests they are. Better to leave the HTML IDs for unchanging Javascript or integration test hooks. Name your CSS classes by their visual function rather than by their application-specific function. For example, say ".highlight-box" instead of ".bundle-product-discount-box". Coding in this way means that you can re-use your existing style-sheets when you role out side-businesses. For example, we started out selling law notes but recently moved into law tutors. Our old CSS classes had names like ".download_document_box", a class name that makes sense when talking about digital documents but would only confuse when applied to the new domain of private tutors. A better name that fits both existing services — and any future ones — would be ".pretty_callout_box". Avoid naming CSS classes after specific grid information. There was (and still is) a dreadful anti-pattern in CSS communities whereby designers and creators of CSS frameworks (cough Twitter Bootstrap) believe that "span-2" or "cols-8" are reasonable names for CSS classes. The point of CSS is to give you the possibility to modify your design without affecting the markup (much). Hardcoding grids sizes into the HTML thwarts this goal, so it is advised against in any project expected to last longer than a weekend. More on how we avoided grid classes later. Split your CSS across files. Ideally you would split everything into "components"/"widgets" and then compose pages from these atoms of design. Realistically though, you'll notice that some of your website pages have idiosyncrasies (e.g. a special layout, or a weird photo gallery that appears in just one article). In these cases you might create a file related to that specific page, only refactoring into a full-blown widget when it becomes clear that the element will be re-used elsewhere. This is a tradeoff, one that is motivated by practical budgetary concerns. Minimise nesting. Introduce new classes instead of nesting selectors. The fact that SASS removes the pain of repeating selectors when nesting doesn't mean that you have to nest five levels deep. Never over-qualify a selector (e.g. don't use "ul.nav" where ".nav" could do the same job.) And don't specify HTML elements alongside the custom class name (e.g."h2.highlight"). Instead just use the class name alone and drop the base selector (e.g. the previous example should be ".highlight"). Over-qualifying selectors doesn't add any value. Create styles for HTML elements (e.g. "h1") only when styling base components which should be consistent in the whole application. Avoid broad selectors like "header ul" because it's likely that you have to override them in some places anyway. As we keep saying, most of the time you want to use a specific, well-named class whenever you want a particular style. Embrace the basics of Block-Element-Modifier. You can read about it for example on here. We used it quite lightly, but still it helped us a lot in organising CSS styles.

你应该看看边界元法。

理论

BEM试图提供一组用于组织和命名css选择器的指令，以使选择器更具可重用性和模块化，并避免选择器之间的冲突，这种冲突通常会导致意大利面条式的代码和特定的问题。

如果正确使用，它实际上有一些非常积极的影响。

当样式被添加到元素中时，它们的作用是您所期望的 样式不会泄露，并且只影响它们所添加的内容 样式与文档结构完全解耦 不同的风格不需要被强迫凌驾于彼此之上

BEM works well with SASS to bring an almost object oriented style to CSS. You can build modular files, that handle the display of a single UI element and contain variables, such as colours and 'methods' such as how internal elements are handled. While a hardcore OO programmer might balk at this idea, in fact, the applied concepts bring in a lot of the nicer parts of OO structures, such as modularity, loose coupling and tight cohesion and context free re-usability. You can even build in a way that looks like an encapsulated object by using Sass and the & operator.

更多来自Smashing杂志的深入文章可以在这里找到;还有一个来自CCS Wizardry的Harry Roberts(任何参与css的人都应该读一下他的书)。

在实践中

我已经用过它几次了，还用过SMACSS和OOCSS，这意味着我也可以对它们进行比较。我也在一些大混乱中工作过，通常是我自己没有经验的创作。

当我在现实世界中使用BEM时，我用一些额外的原则来增强这种技术。我利用实用工具类-一个很好的例子是包装类:

.page-section {
    width: 100%;
}
@media screen and (min-width: 1200px) {
    margin: 0 auto;
    width: 1200px;
}

我也有些依赖于级联和特异性。在这里，BEM模块将是.primary-box，而.header将是特定重写的上下文

.header {
  .primary-box {
    color: #000;
  }
}

(我尽我最大的努力使所有的东西都是通用的和上下文无关的，这意味着一个好的项目几乎所有的东西都在可重用的模块中)

我想说的最后一点是，无论你的项目看起来多么小，多么简单，你都应该从一开始就这么做，原因有二:

项目越来越复杂，所以打下良好的基础是很重要的，包括CSS 即使是一个看起来很简单的项目，因为它是建立在WordPress上的，JavaScript很少，但在CSS中仍然非常复杂——好吧，你不需要做任何服务器端编码，所以这部分很简单，但是宣传册前端有20个模块和每个模块的3个变体:你有一些非常复杂的CSS !

Web组件

在2015年，我们开始关注Web组件。我对这些还不太了解，但它们希望将所有前端功能放在自包含的模块中，有效地尝试将各种原则从BEM应用到前端作为一个整体，并将分散但完全耦合的元素(如DOM片段、Js (MVC)和CSS)组合在一起，这些元素都构建相同的UI小部件。

通过这样做，他们b将解决css中存在的一些原始问题，我们试图用BEM等东西来解决这些问题，同时使其他一些前端架构更加合理。

这里有一些进一步的阅读材料，还有一个框架聚合物，非常值得一看

最后

我也认为这是一个优秀的、现代的css最佳实践指南——专门为防止大型css项目变得混乱而设计。我尽量遵循其中的大部分。