3 ms·

Personally, I'd go with hugo as it is fast at generating but I've used nikola for years as it is python based (my prefered language). I'd recommend checking out

by drad 7y ago

Personally, I'd go with hugo as it is fast at generating but I've used nikola for years as it is python based (my prefered language). I'd recommend checking out https://www.staticgen.com/ https://www.staticgen.com/ as it tracks SSG's popularity and gives nice info. A SSG built on a language/platform you are comfortable with is always a plus as sometimes you just need to get under the hood and ti.ker with things.

heliodor 7y ago
Thank you for pointing out StaticGen. Now I can find the product built with technologies I know so that I can get stuff done quickly instead of learning the tools of the most popular product on that list.
KajMagnus 7y ago
And for people who want "Hugo but written in Rust" or "Hugo but written in Javascript" — then, there's Zola (Rust): https://github.com/getzola/zola https://github.com/getzola/zola, and 11ty (Javascript): https://github.com/11ty/eleventy https://github.com/11ty/eleventy. (Or at least that's how I think about these two.)
- nicoburns 7y ago
  Why would you want that? I generally prefer Rust or JavaScript over Go. But with a static site generator, you're not actually using the language at all, and Hugo has a much bigger ecosystem.
  - mynegation 7y ago
    Some people may want to tinker with the generator, write some plugins (if supported) or just see how it is built.
  - nine_k 7y ago
    Looking in the sources? Fixing a bug?
  - DarthGhandi 7y ago
    Exactly, I've tried a bunch and ended up with one written in a language I know absolutely nothing about. Find it incredibly strange when people say ”static site generator written in X” as though it means anything to the end user. And truly if compilation speed is actually of any importance to you as a blogger perhaps you are too big to be a "blogger". There's no major static site generator out there that doesn't have enough customisation for well over 99% of users.
  - armonraphiel 7y ago
    Could be helpful when writing your own plugins or simplifying/speeding up what your CD server needs to do.

by drad 7y ago

heliodor 7y ago

Thank you for pointing out StaticGen. Now I can find the product built with technologies I know so that I can get stuff done quickly instead of learning the tools of the most popular product on that list.

KajMagnus 7y ago

And for people who want "Hugo but written in Rust" or "Hugo but written in Javascript" — then, there's Zola (Rust): https://github.com/getzola/zola https://github.com/getzola/zola, and 11ty (Javascript): https://github.com/11ty/eleventy https://github.com/11ty/eleventy. (Or at least that's how I think about these two.)

nicoburns 7y ago
Why would you want that? I generally prefer Rust or JavaScript over Go. But with a static site generator, you're not actually using the language at all, and Hugo has a much bigger ecosystem.
- mynegation 7y ago
  Some people may want to tinker with the generator, write some plugins (if supported) or just see how it is built.
- nine_k 7y ago
  Looking in the sources? Fixing a bug?
- DarthGhandi 7y ago
  Exactly, I've tried a bunch and ended up with one written in a language I know absolutely nothing about. Find it incredibly strange when people say ”static site generator written in X” as though it means anything to the end user. And truly if compilation speed is actually of any importance to you as a blogger perhaps you are too big to be a "blogger". There's no major static site generator out there that doesn't have enough customisation for well over 99% of users.
- armonraphiel 7y ago
  Could be helpful when writing your own plugins or simplifying/speeding up what your CD server needs to do.