4 ms·
I feel as though if you just want a static website, you're better to use one of the more mature frameworks designed for that purpose, like Ruby on Rails or Asp.
by jmkni 6y ago
I feel as though if you just want a static website, you're better to use one of the more mature frameworks designed for that purpose, like Ruby on Rails or Asp.net Core etc.
I worked on a project built with Nuxt about a about a year ago and I really didn't like it. Everything felt like a chore.
- ComputerGuru 6y agoAm I missing something or did the definition of static website change? AFAIK a static site is one that has no backend and you can throw on S3 or whatever. An ASP.NET project is pretty much the absolute furthest you can get from a static website.
- holtalanm 6y agoRoR and Asp.net Core are not static site generators. They are web app frameworks that typically involve server-side rendered html. A better example of a static site generator would be something like Jekyll (https://jekyllrb.com/ https://jekyllrb.com/)