4 ms·
Having been on the other side of a messy ruby project, which had large parts of itself overridden by some addon scripts, maybe that's a good thing!
by meibo 3y ago
Having been on the other side of a messy ruby project, which had large parts of itself overridden by some addon scripts, maybe that's a good thing!
- arp242 3y agoContext is everything. In the context of Jekyll, all of this is certainly a useful feature: this is not code that needs to be re-used or maintained in the same way as your Rails project has to be. As always, engage your brain before doing anything and you don't need to use these features, but it gives you the tools to do "smart things" that Go simply can't. This, among other things, means that Jekyll will scale reasonably well with your website as your needs grow, without having to add features to Jekyll core, using your own fork of Jekyll, or switching to something completely different. For example, I have a little plugin[1] to work around a bug[2] and to skip the hard-coded requirement to have a date in the filename.[3] Is this ugly? Yes. Is this fine to generate a relatively simple personal website? Also yes. [1]: https://github.com/arp242/arp242.net/blob/master/_plugins/no_date.rb https://github.com/arp242/arp242.net/blob/master/_plugins/no... [2]: https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll/issues/8707 https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll/issues/8707 [3]: https://stackoverflow.com/a/68287682/660921 https://stackoverflow.com/a/68287682/660921
- devonkim 3y agoI’m having some nightmare flashbacks to the “plugin” ecosystems of various PHP CMSes including WordPress
- scruple 3y agoYeah, in large projects that span a number of developers I agree with you. In a project that only I will ever touch? Like my personal blog? No way am I not going to reach for the most powerful featurea of a language. That sounds like exactly the right place to experiment with them.