5 ms·
This is tangential/possibly off-topic. I was wondering if anyone could educate me as to why this site needs to use next.js in the first place (the site of the b
by nstart 8y ago
This is tangential/possibly off-topic. I was wondering if anyone could educate me as to why this site needs to use next.js in the first place (the site of the blog, not spectrum). It's mentioned in this blog post and I followed the link. The full tech stack is given here -> https://github.com/mxstbr/mxstbr.com#tech-stack https://github.com/mxstbr/mxstbr.com#tech-stack
I went through the codebase, and the content itself is static. I'm not attempting to bash the decision to use next at all. I'm only looking to grow my understanding of the usage of next since I see it being mentioned a lot.
The question I have is, why use next/react for what appears to be a static site. Or, why not use static html + markdown?
Again, not bashing. Just looking for reasons that I might have missed due to my lack of understanding/context.
- sisk 8y agoSame reason why some folks like Gatsby. Navigate around his site and you'll see it loads in very quickly and with push state instead of full reloads. It's been done many times over for every stack and client side tool (pJax!) but that includes the next.js router.
- ousta 8y agoyeah you can do that with html and javascript since the 90s
- Vinnl 8y agoHaving built my blog with React Static, I can tell you that this is far easier and fool-proof to do than it is using HTML and Javascript. It might sound like introducing a tool is overcomplicating things, but in this case, it really is simpler. (Not sure if this holds for Next.js as well, since I believe it does a few other things too, but React Static has been a breeze for me.)
- jefftk 8y agoIt's fast, but for a simple site like this I suspect plain HTML + cacheable CSS would be just as fast.
- kkarakk 8y agowho among us who uses react is a css master tho?