I'm in two minds whether the OP is satire. This quote in particular sells me on the idea of satire: > Almost anything that relies on structured input would be

I'm in two minds whether the OP is satire. This quote in particular sells me on the idea of satire: > Almost anything that relies on structured input would be more convenient with an AI solution You could take what you know about that structure and deterministically transform it, or you could just vibe it over to chatGPT! That doesn't seem like a serious statement at all. But this feels real: > I looked into some other generators: Jekyll, Pelican, and so on. But everything seemed to have two problems. First, most of these seemed overkill for what I wanted to do. And second, despite the overhead, many didn’t seem to provide the kind of flexibility I wanted — they relied on writing strict Markdown or fitting within a predefined way of structuring the site. That's an understandable problem. The purists will suggest, "Just write HTML", but markdown is convenient. For anyone facing this issue, I'd suggest pandoc does a great job at transforming markdown to html. One of the benefits of HTML was that it would work around what it considered "bad" input. You didn't even need to close tags properly a lot of the time. If you made an error, you'd still get mostly correct output. Pandoc markdown isn't too fussy either. They have a markdown_strict variant if you want strict spec adherence. They also have a gfm (github flavoured markdown) option for those of us used to the github extensions. Pandoc parses a small markdown page into html in, well: Milliseconds : 71 So, certainly faster than any LLM response time.