3 ms·
FWIW, a leaderboard of SSGs: https://www.staticgen.com/ https://www.staticgen.com/
by tardismechanic 6y ago
FWIW, a leaderboard of SSGs:
https://www.staticgen.com/ https://www.staticgen.com/
- MisterPea 6y agoWhy is this space so bloated?
- tobr 6y agoProbably because of bike shedding. It’s not exactly hard to write some simple code from scratch to read the input files, pass them through various parsers, templates, processors, and write out the result. The heavy lifting is done by the processors, which you typically don’t need to write yourself. So an SSG is an attempt to put an abstraction on top of this, which may have some benefits but also introduces a lot of relatively uncalled for complexity and fragile dependency chains. And because the nature of the task is very heterogeneous, the API will either have to be very allowing (and less useful as an abstraction) or impose various assumptions and restrictions on how you do things. That’s very fertile ground for a lot of people to want to create their own take on it as they run into limitations of existing SSGs.
- divbzero 6y ago> It’s not exactly hard to write some simple code from scratch to read the input files, pass them through various parsers, templates, processors, and write out the result. I think this is it exactly. You could roll your own if you wanted and package it as a library without too much difficulty and I haven’t found compelling reasons why any one static generator is superior to another. It seems to come down to which generators are supported by default by your hosting service, or your language of preference if you’re building custom extensions.
- mturmon 6y ago100% agree. Thus, the real question is not: "Why are there so many static site generators?" It is rather: "Why isn't there a static site generator generator?"
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]