I haven't personally worked on projects using Bulma, but I've interacted with developers who've used it extensively. Here's some insight based on their experiences:


Positive Aspects :

* Flexibility : Developers appreciated Bulma's flexibility and modularity. Its utility-first approach allowed for quick prototyping and easy customization.

* Clean and Readable Code : The use of utility classes contributed to cleaner HTML markup and better code readability, making it easier to understand and maintain.

* Responsive Design : Bulma's built-in responsiveness using Flexbox was praised. Creating responsive layouts and handling different screen sizes was relatively straightforward.

* Community and Documentation : Users found the Bulma community supportive, and the documentation comprehensive and easy to follow.
Challenges Faced :

* Specific Design Requirements : While Bulma offers flexibility, some users found it challenging to implement highly specific or intricate designs without additional custom CSS.

* Customization Overhead : Heavy customization beyond Bulma's default styles sometimes required writing additional CSS or overriding existing styles, which could be seen as an overhead.

* Learning Curve : For developers transitioning from other frameworks or not familiar with Flexbox, there might be a learning curve in understanding Bulma's unique approach and utility classes.

* JavaScript Components : Bulma is primarily a CSS framework, lacking extensive pre-built JavaScript components compared to frameworks like Bootstrap. This meant additional work when implementing complex JavaScript functionality.