3 ms·
That sounds completely counter-intuitive to me. A static site generator is run once you add something to your site, i.e. not that often. So a slight hit in star
by mhd 15y ago
That sounds completely counter-intuitive to me. A static site generator is run once you add something to your site, i.e. not that often. So a slight hit in startup speed isn't really a factor, whereas runtime efficiency is (dependencies are hard, so most SSG's out there recreate the whole site for each new post/page).
- shintoist 15y agoI gotta agree on that, the only reason for needing a fast start up time is if you want to rebuild after every change and see the result, but misaki actually watches for changes while it's running. An extra second or two on start up really doesn't matter one bit.
- mhd 15y agoHonestly, why? Considering the rather insane amount of time something like jekyll needs, a few seconds don't matter at all. So having a background service won't really get you anything for "production" usage – even if you'd be doing twitter-like 20+ items/day micro-blogging. The only gain I could imagine from a setup like this would be prototyping the look and feel of your site in its very early stage, where it would save you from half a dozen script invocations. Those seconds would only matter if they would be a large percentage of the whole running time. And I've yet to see a SSG where two, three seconds for a year or more worth of blogging would actually matter.
- heretohelp 15y agoI wonder why SSGs don't use tup?