4 ms·
Slowly getting somewhat cynical. This is the only space where both "prebuilds everything and therefore saves rendering time and improves caching" and "no build
by sriku 4y ago
Slowly getting somewhat cynical. This is the only space where both "prebuilds everything and therefore saves rendering time and improves caching" and "no build step and so speeds up deployment" are both considered valid feature pitches.
- norman784 4y agoTo me it reads more focused on developers than users of the site you build. I like that in the last couple of years the developer experience was improved in some ways, this kind of apps that you could develop "easily" as monolithic could be served in a serverless hosting as a microservice (if I understood correctly how serverless works) serving each endpoint as a separate service, everything without you as dev put too much effort into it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- madeofpalk 4y agoWhy does that make you cynical? They're two different spins on how to render content. They both have pros and cons. It's good to know this and make an informed decision about which strategy you take.
- marcosdumay 4y agoOn the last decade and half the entire group mind of the computing discipline switched from "no build step will speed-up development and deployment" into "a heavy build step will speed-up development and deployment". So, it's not like the web developers were going at it alone. Anyway, the change happened because of real environmental changes. Developers everywhere didn't just wake-up and decide their old values were the exact opposite of the truth, both opinions stand on valid models of the world and hard-acquired empirical information.
- qudat 4y ago> Slowly getting somewhat cynical Are you equally cynical about the hundreds (thousands?) of different ways to setup and deploy infrastructure (all with different pros/cons)? FE is timid compared to devops churn.