[flagged]
Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
51–60 of 69 posts
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#52[flagged]
"Works on PHP 8 without preinstalled frameworks"
I like it, but it is not a static site generator, can't compare both things.
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand why your suggested version is more explicit, safer, or less error prone. You'll have to justify that to me! 'cargo install ripgrep' has worked on every machine I've run it on. It's also easy for me to send to other people I work with. Your suggestion requires me go and find the repository. If I just clone the repository it's going to get the current master branch, not the most recent release (which…
Crates.io is a flat namespace. If you have to lookup the exact crate name (and you do , because otherwise you’re installing who-knows-what) what difference does it make? It’s just a lazy tool for lazy installs that only works when there are a) not that many people using it (easy memorable names that aren’t easy to mess up still exist), and b) no bad actors squatting on typo names. You can’t be more explicit than “bui…
You also can't be more explicit -- and terse -- by running `cargo install ripgrep`.
You said: IF you have to lookup the exact crate name. Well, for 90% of those I use, I don't have to. And it works just fine as your parent commenter said.
You have a preference, cool, but don't try to push it as the better way in an objective sense because it's not. It's just one of the alternatives.
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#54Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#55[stub for offtopicness]
The fact people still add "written in Rust" to HN submissions is almost as funny as how effective it is, which itself is almost as funny as the fact that people like me can't stop commenting on it.
I just notice that someone (admins) edited and removed the `written in Rust` part of my post.
Not fair.. other posts have `written in Python` on it.
Why was that?
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#56[offtopic]
I just noticed that my original post title has been edited (not by me) and the part where it said `written in Rust` has been removed.
I see other posts on the page showing `built with Python`, `Python based`, why `written in Rust` was not allowed? just curious.
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crates.io is a flat namespace. If you have to lookup the exact crate name (and you do , because otherwise you’re installing who-knows-what) what difference does it make? It’s just a lazy tool for lazy installs that only works when there are a) not that many people using it (easy memorable names that aren’t easy to mess up still exist), and b) no bad actors squatting on typo names. You can’t be more explicit than “bui…
You also can't be more explicit -- and terse -- by running `cargo install ripgrep`. You said: IF you have to lookup the exact crate name. Well, for 90% of those I use, I don't have to. And it works just fine as your parent commenter said. You have a preference, cool, but don't try to push it as the better way in an objective sense because it's not. It's just one of the alternatives.
What you’re written it literally false.
You have no idea what that command does. It fetches something off the internet and builds it and installs it.
It is objectively less explicit than having a local folder that you have explicitly fetched, and run a build on.
It is also objectively easier to make a mistake when you type a single command that fetches and installs as one step, than it is to clone, and review then build it.
So, apart from being objectively wrong, I do agree with you; for now, it is easy, convenient and honestly, good.
However, I think you’re being extremely short sighted.
As I said, and as you can see, yourself, from the “command-install” related issues on the cargo issue tracker, the status quo isn’t gong to last. More people will use it. More people will want to distribute binary dependencies and prebuilt binaries.
We are walking blindly into a future where a “cargo install marmelaide” (whoops, was it marmite? Did I spell it right?) installs what you didn’t expect it to, and where people increasingly pressure for more features to be added to cargo to support, the obvious lack of features cargo install currently has (again, read the issue tracker if you doubt me or for some reason think I'm making this up).
I don't support that; but sure, that's just my opinion.
There are other fully featured better designed alternatives. Cargo does not need to be, or should be, a dumpster fire of features in order to be a generic cross platform application distribution tool.
I don't see that as being controversial. /shrug
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also can't be more explicit -- and terse -- by running `cargo install ripgrep`. You said: IF you have to lookup the exact crate name. Well, for 90% of those I use, I don't have to. And it works just fine as your parent commenter said. You have a preference, cool, but don't try to push it as the better way in an objective sense because it's not. It's just one of the alternatives.
What you’re written it literally false. You have no idea what that command does. It fetches something off the internet and builds it and installs it. It is objectively less explicit than having a local folder that you have explicitly fetched, and run a build on. It is also objectively easier to make a mistake when you type a single command that fetches and installs as one step, than it is to clone, and review then bu…
The command you suggest also festches something from the internet and builds it. You could just as easily typo and get someone else's git repository, and again, I'm not going and reading the source code to find out if I have the right program.
I'm not reviewing the source code to ripgrep, and even if I did, I'm definately not review the code of all of it's dependancies, which are getting downloaded when I build it anyway.
Also, it's not objectively easier to make a mistake when you type one command, than when you type three. I would say my error rate goes up as I type more, so I feel it's objectively easier to make a mistake with your method.
Also, why not have cargo install stuff? It already does. If it makes ten thousand's people lives easier, by letting them type one line instead of three, and have to go find the right git repository to clone, then surely that's better?
Also, you still haven't discussed that your method does the (in my opinion) clearly wrong thing of building whatever the current state of the master branch is, rather than a release.
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#59> cargo install marmite I'm not the only one (1) that believes this is wrong direction for cargo, and is abusing it's intent and purpose. If you want to distribute an application, there are lots of ways to do that. If it's a developer tools, for developers, `cargo install` might be suitable, sure... but I think there's a fair argument to be made that if you want a tool: git clone foo cd foo cargo install --path . Is…
I just tried `cargo binstall marmite`, but it feels (in this case?) that it was the same as doing `cargo install`. Anyway, if you have cargo (ergo, the whole rust toolchain), you might as well explicitly download the git repo, as things need to be downloaded when you do a plain `cargo install` as well. A rust-sanctioned way to get just binary builds that do not require the whole rust toolchain installed would be best. There is a single-binary `cargo-binstall` but that only works when there is made provision by the crate to make a binary available.
Re: Show HN: Marmite – Zero-config static site generator
#60> cargo install marmite I'm not the only one (1) that believes this is wrong direction for cargo, and is abusing it's intent and purpose. If you want to distribute an application, there are lots of ways to do that. If it's a developer tools, for developers, `cargo install` might be suitable, sure... but I think there's a fair argument to be made that if you want a tool: git clone foo cd foo cargo install --path . Is…
I like cargo because it's an easy way to install programs. Pip and npm are used like apt and yum too.
This is a feature to me, not problem, and it has been this way for many years.