|
|
|
|
|
by codeptualize
951 days ago
|
|
So pelican and hugo are not frameworks? How is a static site generator any different from statically exporting next.js/nuxt.js or similar? I've used all the things mentioned, and I quite like the ergonomics of frameworks for static websites. Added benefit is that I can make static sites dynamic if necessary. And to be clear, these static exports are incredibly fast and performant. > you could roll your own SSG in a weekend Sure, I could do that, or I could build my app/website in that weekend.. |
|
Sure, you can make plugins for Pelican to make it generate things the way you want, but it's still just a generator/builder using Jinja templates and Markdown or some other text transformation tool.
Also, there's no real indicator that I used Pelican to build my site. There's no cruft I'm including in my <head> element or anything else. It outputs regular-ass HTML.
I'm sure it's nice to be able to swap into dynamic web app mode if you decide a project's going differently than expected, but I don't run into that much with the things I design. I usually know from the beginning which tech I'll need to achieve the goal.
Frameworks force the dev into specific ways of doing things, so if a program fits into that architecture, go nuts. I'm curious what you guys need on your sites that require so much JS.