Kaushal Modi is a user on mastodon.technology. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

Hugo is lit. the best platform for static blogs. So why don't I write much more on mine?

\_(0xe3 0x83 0x84)_/

@vagnes I'm a big fan of #gutenberg, which is basically #hugo but with a sane templating syntax

My review comparing the two:


My response to this closing argument in your post about where Hugo "lacks":

> Gutenberg can compile Sass files to generate CSS output.

There is now inbuilt support in Hugo for this for past few weeks.

> Gutenberg will optionally generate an automatic search index; Hugo lacks that feature, but can implement it using several external plugins.

Hugo has a Theme Component feature using using which you can add search to your site using few lines.


> (Note that the speed comparisons above didn't include either of these features, or the multi-language feature in Hugo. All of these would slow down site generation.)

Adding these features to Hugo has negligible speed difference.

Kaushal Modi @kaushalmodi


> The last feature where Gutenberg pulls ahead is syntax highlighting.

It depends on the language being parsed. The Hugo syntax highlighting using Chroma is super fast and supports syntax highlighting of nested blocks in different languages (again depends on the quality of language lexer which varies with language). So this is not a fair comparison. For example, Hugo highlights syntax which probably no other highlighter does.


Yeah, with Hugo's latest update, the "objective" advantages for Gutenberg are very nearly gone—the two projects are very nearly equivalent.

Subjectively, I strongly prefer Gutenberg's templating syntax, the language it's written in, and the small size of its codebase. But I recognize that all three are maters of taste