4 ms·
Seems like a ton of tools/dependancies/frameworks to do something relatively simple. What is the benefit of this over using Hugo with Go templates?
by ilovecaching 5y ago
Seems like a ton of tools/dependancies/frameworks to do something relatively simple. What is the benefit of this over using Hugo with Go templates?
- jjice 5y agoI'm not sure how extensible Hugo is, but Next allows full server side code. From my understanding (which may very well be wrong), Hugo is for static site generation.
- IceWreck 5y agoIf you want a fully static site, go with Hugo. Site generation is way way faster. Next offers using React as your templating language as well as adding in server side code if you want instead of static site generation.
- waprin 5y agoThe main benefit of NextJS is that it makes it very easy to write code once and quickly swap whether it's going to be statically generated ahead of time, rendered on the server, or rendered dynamically on the client. It also comes with a bunch of features you'll likely need for a modern web page like image optimization and a really nice PaaS to deploy it to.
- matsemann 5y agoOne benefit is that it's JS. Yes, really. For every Go developer, there are a thousand that know JS.
- colesantiago 5y agoGo's templating system is woefully awful.