Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by spondylosaurus on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @03:43PM
(#36591659)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but this doesn't sound all that different from your average static site generator—Python-based Jinja templating for HTML files versus Ruby-based Liquid templating for HTML/Markdown files (i.e., Jekyll).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by nickstinemates on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @03:48PM
(#36591722)
Instead of using an off the shelf framework, they made their own.
And that's cool. Making stuff is fun.
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by spondylosaurus on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @04:00PM
(#36591826)
For sure! I'm all in favor of bespoke new tools. If anything I'm just confused about the way they describe this in contrast to SSGs (and why a SSG wasn't a good option for them), and then go on to create a tool that literally generates a static site. :P
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but the reasons they gave for not using an established SSG primed me to expect a radically new solution. Versus "we didn't like any existing SSGs so we built our own," which was my takeaway from the whole thing.
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by Terretta on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @05:33PM
(#36592760)
I'm with you. Jinja and watchdog.py taking somefile.src.html -> somefile.html feels a bit static-site-gen-ish.
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by fullstackchris on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @05:39PM
(#36592841)
nooooooo!!! its totally without a framework though!!!! /s
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by dang on Tuesday July 04, 2023 @08:26PM
(#36594208)
Can you please stop posting unsubstantive comments? We're trying for something different here.
Re:How to build a website without frameworks and tons of lib...
by mystertea on Friday July 07, 2023 @12:56PM
(#36634657)
I was thinking the same thing. If the author's goal was simplicity, it seems like a strange choice to forgo using an existing SSG only to build a bespoke one on their own.
A PHP site (for the includes), or an out-of-the-box SSG would make much more sense, IMO.