3 ms·

I've been using Gatsby recently and it's been pretty good, as long as you're not opposed to node and JS.

• smt88 6y ago
  We're looking at Gatsby now. We don't care about the language used to generate a site as long as it doesn't send silent errors into the finished result (always a concern with JS...) What else did you try before landing on Gatsby?
  • egeozcan 6y ago
    (not op) I personally love next.js but I guess it'd bee too flexible for some.
  • cercatrova 6y ago
    I'd personally try NextJS, it's a lot easier than Gatsby. This is the main article that turned my mind after trying both: https://jaredpalmer.com/gatsby-vs-nextjs https://jaredpalmer.com/gatsby-vs-nextjs
  • dagmx 6y ago
    I tried Jekyll, Hugo and Pelican. Neither sat as well with me personally as Gatsby. I like only having to worry about a single language stack, and I can use typescript with Gatsby which negates some of my misgivings with js. Plus I can use react paradigms everywhere which is nice.
  • strogonoff 6y ago
    Using react-static here. Has some issues and not always free of regressions, but also not as bloated as say Gatsby. If you write React components in a way that leaves them functioning when statically rendered, I think it is relatively straightforward to roll your own generator that calls React’s built-in renderToString() on top-level app component during HTML generation, and bundles basic JS that does hydrate() in case user agent happens to have JS enabled (those two methods do a lot of the heavy-lifting). Devil’s in the details, of course, but have been low-key looking into that lately.