3 ms·
> It's blazing fast. This seems like an odd value proposition for a static site generator. Even a really shitty, unoptimized single threaded non-incremental b
by bogwog 6y ago
> It's blazing fast.
This seems like an odd value proposition for a static site generator.
Even a really shitty, unoptimized single threaded non-incremental build system shouldn’t struggle too hard to compile a static site. And even if it does, if it has a good amount of features, it shouldn’t be a problem for most use-cases.
- plorkyeran 6y agoUsing jekyll I've gotten 30+ minute build times for sites. SSGs aren't only useful for sites with a single-digit number of pages.
- JackMorgan 6y agoI switched from Jekyll, it's amazing to me how slow it was to build a simple hundred pages of HTML. What Hugo does in Uber a second took Jekyll several minutes.