[HN Gopher] From Gatsby gridlock to Astro bliss: my personal sit...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       From Gatsby gridlock to Astro bliss: my personal site redesign
        
       Author : jwngr
       Score  : 96 points
       Date   : 2024-09-26 17:47 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (jwn.gr)
 (TXT) w3m dump (jwn.gr)
        
       | schpet wrote:
       | if you keep your site on github, i found keystatic to be a really
       | nice authoring experience: https://github.com/Thinkmill/keystatic
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Thanks for the link. I prefer the simplicity of .mdx files for
         | now. My use case is very basic and Astro already handles it
         | well.
        
           | schpet wrote:
           | keystatic supports editing mdx files. keystatic is basically
           | a frontend to update files on github, so if e.g. you want to
           | write a blog post from your phone it can let you do that kind
           | of thing.
        
             | jwngr wrote:
             | Oh cool, I see. Didn't get that impression when I first
             | looked. I will check it out!
        
       | cpursley wrote:
       | I don't love js/ts but Astro is so nice. Don't have to fiddle
       | with react or graphql. Just upgraded to 5 beta and nothing broke.
       | Really well managed project. Oh, and page load speed is insane.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Yeah they really nailed the developer experience. There is very
         | little magic to it.
        
         | garyrob wrote:
         | If you don't love js/ts maybe you'd like Civet, which
         | transpiles to js/ts and has Astro integration. (No
         | relationship, I've just been looking at it myself.)
         | 
         | https://civet.dev
        
           | cpursley wrote:
           | This does look nice (as a functional programmer - Elixir,
           | elm, etc and fan of coffeescript back before modern js). Even
           | has pipes!
        
           | bryanrasmussen wrote:
           | transpiling to JS that has if, if else structures instead of
           | just early return if makes me not trust it (based on first
           | "pattern matching" example on civet.dev site). I guess I have
           | my prejudices.
        
       | abeisgreat wrote:
       | Great write up, will be curious to see if Astro sticks around. It
       | seems like all the static site gens last a few years then fade
       | away - Jekyll, Hugo, Gatsby, etc.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Me too! The closer my framework is to raw HTML, JavaScript
         | (really TypeScript nowadays), and CSS, the less lock-in I feel.
         | Those 3 languages are continue to get better year over year.
         | And we are get better framework abstractions every few years
         | too. Astro feels like it hit the sweet spot, but maybe there is
         | more to come.
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | I am still not over the collapse of Gatsby (for reference i
       | nearly joined the company in 2017, was saved only by my own
       | character flaws).
       | 
       | They rode the highs - being the default docs tool for React, and
       | building a massive ecosystem of integrations you could install
       | out of the box. But too many abstractions, divided goals between
       | cloud and OSS, and the better stewardship/design of Nextjs
       | brought it down.
       | 
       | There were the simple lessons (https://swyx.io/a-world-without-
       | plugins-cig). its easy to say in hindsight that graphql was too
       | much for gatsby. i also believe the company went too hard for
       | number of integrations over quality of them, an issue I had even
       | in my interview. this was a poorer expression of the better
       | insight that seb markbage had; just have a small api surface area
       | bro (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4anAwXYqLG8)
       | 
       | But the bigger lesson is bitterer. Frontend tooling isnt worth
       | that much. the fact that vercel is pretty much the only
       | successful frontend startup of its generation makes it an
       | exception to the rule (there are plenty of smaller companies that
       | are thriving, like tailwind, but it is not a venture scale
       | startup and thats fine). People dont pay for frontend tooling.
       | they expect it to be free, expect it to do everything, get into
       | internicine squabbles between frameworks when they are all
       | basically doomed compared to just betting on React sponsored by
       | Facebook and now Vercel (and a little bit of Shopify), or going
       | back to fullstack frameworks like Django/Rails/Laravel. all
       | frontend tooling, nextjs included, is just leadgen, loss leaders,
       | while investors/salespeople patiently wait until you "grow up"
       | by... building cloud backend/ci/cd services.
       | 
       | 5 years ago i wrote about the "frontend ceiling" for individual
       | developer careers (https://x.com/swyx/status/1682748872047886337)
       | - i fear this is the "frontend ceiling" for companies.
       | 
       | I deeply admire Astro and hope they figure out a way to break the
       | ceiling. Their recent cloud products have been encouraging.
        
         | epolanski wrote:
         | Graphql was what made me hate Gatsby to be honest.
         | 
         | I think Typescript's websites uses it (or used to), and I
         | wanted to fix a bug in the website and holy hell if Gatsby made
         | me dislike the experience..
        
           | andrewingram wrote:
           | Even as a massive GraphQL fan, the GraphQL layer is what made
           | me migrate all my projects away from Gatsby. It just doesn't
           | portray it at its best.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Astro is what I wanted and thought Gatsby would be. GraphQL was
         | the wrong sized abstraction for a basic blog site like mine.
         | And once Gatsby turned towards the cloud (which made sense as a
         | business), everything just got so complicated. I was swept up
         | by it too.
         | 
         | Cool insight on frontend ceilings -- deployment is king.
        
         | mmckelvy wrote:
         | My bet is on Remix (which will eventually just be React
         | Router). I think it's just the right amount of abstraction over
         | native web functionality with a nice, simple API that doesn't
         | deviate too much from web standards. I also think the full
         | stack approach just makes sense for developing on the web.
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | > which will eventually just be React Router
           | 
           | how strongly do you believe this. because ive just read both
           | docs and i think they have different goals/audiences (tho
           | obviously same owner). i think react router will be a poorer
           | project if it starts to require serverside components like it
           | is looking
        
             | mmckelvy wrote:
             | They made an announcement that they are merging the
             | projects a little while back:
             | https://remix.run/blog/merging-remix-and-react-router.
             | Obviously things could change, but I think RR v7 will
             | effectively be the next iteration of Remix.
        
               | swyx wrote:
               | ah yeah. they didnt quite address my concerns in that
               | post. but they know better than i.
        
           | mind-blight wrote:
           | I'm a huge remix fan. Remix, Shadcn, postgres, and Prisma
           | have been great for rapid development
        
           | soufianee wrote:
           | Remix is backed by Shopify, compared to Next.js being backed
           | by Vercel. Does this influence any decision to take?
           | 
           | Today Next.js has a big advantage which is that they have
           | already integrated most of the new React 19 rendering
           | features and apis. I think it will take a while for Remix to
           | catch up to that.
           | 
           | Other notable frameworks are community led Waku made by
           | Daishi Kato from Pmdrs and TanStart made by Tanner from
           | Tanstack.
           | 
           | Also there's Redwood.js betting on a more integrated
           | experience.
           | 
           | Today I am using Nextjs because I don't think I can go back
           | to not using RSCs, but when Remix catches up or Waku and
           | TanStart get to v1, I sure will give them a serious try!
        
             | madeofpalk wrote:
             | > Remix is backed by Shopify
             | 
             | This makes me distrust it (slightly more than I distrust
             | Next/Vercel).
             | 
             | Shopify's core business is not in making javascript
             | frameworks. Remix is always one bad Shopify away from being
             | ejected.
        
         | vladgur wrote:
         | I am for one surprised that the initial concept of Gatsby -- a
         | static site generator with React, GraphQL and other hype words
         | of late 2010s -- was actually able to raise $40+ million
         | dollars to build a platform for what to me at the time seemed
         | incredibly over-engineered stack for static html pages and an
         | unproven founder.
         | 
         | It was truly a testament of times
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | we do live in a society
        
         | com2kid wrote:
         | > But the bigger lesson is bitterer. Frontend tooling isnt
         | worth that much.
         | 
         | This is a modern oddity, as historically front end tooling was
         | worth a _lot_.
         | 
         | During the 80s and 90s, multiple companies made a lot of money
         | off of front end tooling. Even as late as 2009 or so,
         | Silverlight tooling was bringing in money for Microsoft. But
         | think of how popular Flash was and the empire that helped
         | build. Prior to that. Visual Basic helped Microsoft take over
         | the world. Go back another generation and Borland's Delphi
         | dominated for years.
         | 
         | And, arguably, all of those systems were more productive than
         | anything we have now. (A topic I've written about many times!)
         | As an industry, we may indeed be getting exactly what we pay
         | for.
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | yes good point. ofc Unity/Unreal Engine today also makes
           | great money.
           | 
           | i think those frontends you mention made money because they
           | had defacto monopoly on a certain platform or kind of
           | experience that was unavailable anywhere else. xcode is a
           | piece of absolute crap but i still have to pay $100 a year or
           | whatever for it.
           | 
           | perhaps the emergence of web standards - both JS and browser
           | standards - killed frontend. when everyone can build their
           | own tools that run everywhere, and the browser api's are
           | often pretty good, then why buy instead of build, or pick the
           | next one that is free and good enough.
        
             | com2kid wrote:
             | > xcode is a piece of absolute crap but i still have to pay
             | $100 a year or whatever for it.
             | 
             | You say xcode is horrible, but have you tried opening a
             | project in Android Studio after 6 months and getting it to
             | compile again?
             | 
             | It was funny, when I was at Microsoft, almost no one used
             | Visual Studio because it wasn't able to handle code on the
             | scale of MS's code bases. (I think things may be different
             | now). That and it didn't support unusual build scenarios
             | (which now it does.)
             | 
             | I wonder if it is the same case at Apple with xcode. Do OS
             | engineers on MacOS actually use xcode to developer MacOS?
        
           | MikeTheGreat wrote:
           | > Even as late as 2009 or so, Silverlight tooling was
           | bringing in money for Microsoft
           | 
           | Huh. It always kinda seemed like a "Microsoft's version of
           | <...>, because Microsoft always has to compete with
           | everything, including <...>". In this case, <...> is "Adobe
           | Flash"
           | 
           | I'm curious if people have examples of what it was used for?
           | 
           | Looking at the Wikipedia page [1] which says
           | 
           | "According to statowl.com, Microsoft Silverlight had a
           | penetration of 64.2% in May 2011. Usage on July 2010 was
           | 53.6%, whereas as of May 2011 market leader Adobe Flash was
           | installed on 95.3% of browsers, and Java was supported on
           | 76.5% of browsers.[10]"
           | 
           | That shocked me - what was this used for, anyways?
           | 
           | Wikipedia goes on to say
           | 
           | "Silverlight was used to provide video streaming for the NBC
           | coverage of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing,[11] the 2010
           | Winter Olympics in Vancouver,[12] and the 2008 conventions
           | for both major United States political parties.[13]
           | Silverlight was also used by Amazon Video and Netflix for
           | their instant video streaming services"
           | 
           | If Silverlight was being used for Netflix I can see it being
           | installed on 60%+ of browsers just from that.
           | 
           | Still, I'm curious - anybody have have examples of what else
           | it was used for?
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Silverlight
        
             | skeeter2020 wrote:
             | we used it for a highly interactive scheduler UI in a
             | commercial software project. The appeal was do Flash
             | development with .Net developers.
        
             | mirchiseth wrote:
             | SAP used it for their CRM when they moved from desktop
             | client to browser based clients.
        
             | com2kid wrote:
             | Silverlight's real usage was rapid internal corporate app
             | development. Internal tools basically. It is hard to
             | describe exactly how absurdly popular Silverlight was at
             | the time within corporations.
             | 
             | Microsoft had a big internal political battle and did the
             | stupidest thing possible and abandoned Silveright, which
             | pissed off a LOT of companies, who then started building
             | internal web apps instead. This lead to a slow migration
             | off of Microsoft's technology stack within companies, and
             | now basically Office is what is left.
             | 
             | For younger developers, it is hard to describe what life
             | was like before.
             | 
             | So you'd go to work, and there was a custom C#, or possibly
             | Visual Basic, time tracking app you logged into. Internal
             | corporate web pages were written in ASP, or ASPX. Lots of
             | internal databases were running on SQL server or just MS
             | Access, and you directly talked to them through custom apps
             | running on your machine.
             | 
             | Because the C#/VB development experience was so good, this
             | was honestly easier than writing a website is now. Because
             | apps only had to run on one platform (Windows) and mobile
             | didn't exist yet, making UIs was easy-peasy. Microsoft made
             | a _ton_ of inroads into corporate because Bob from
             | Accounting figured out he could setup a database running
             | off of a local file share (MS Access) and write a simple
             | GUI to keep track of vacation usage using some books he
             | found in his local library, or maybe he even got ahold of
             | some old MSDN CDs, which literally had higher quality
             | documentation and examples than anything made in the last
             | 15 years or so.
             | 
             | Silverlight was a continuation of that linage, super easy
             | to write UIs in, super fast to develop. You could data bind
             | a form to a backend database in a few minutes. You'd get
             | full accessibility, hotkeys, everything, faster than you
             | can debug a single CSS issue.
             | 
             | From what I understand (I was a very low level employee
             | when it all went down) the OS org got pissed that the
             | developer org was basically making the dominant UI
             | framework, ripped it away from them and rewrote it as
             | WinRT. Short of it is, Microsoft ended up losing mobile,
             | they lost the trust of corporations, and they lost the
             | trust of developers. After Silverlight died there aren't
             | really anymore "Windows developers" as a career field.
             | Everything moved to websites.
        
               | neonsunset wrote:
               | Silverlight legacy lives on in the form of
               | https://opensilver.net. I don't have experience with it,
               | but am going to assume that it's a shadow of the former
               | self.
               | 
               | They do have a pretty cool demo project however:
               | https://xaml.io
        
           | yen223 wrote:
           | I lived through the times when you had to pay lots of money
           | for software tooling. As a kid from a third-world country, I
           | don't share the same rosy sentiment towards those times.
           | 
           | It's too easy to take for granted, but modern-day free open-
           | source tooling is a godsend for a lot of folks out there.
        
         | dartos wrote:
         | I think frontend tooling is valuable, but there's so much good
         | free out there that it's hard to monetize.
         | 
         | Gatsby always seemed wildly overengineered to me. It's like all
         | the bad parts of react, with all the bad parts of complicated
         | js tooling, and none of the upsides.
         | 
         | Never made sense.
        
         | madeofpalk wrote:
         | Is Vercel a frontend tooling startup?
         | 
         | I've always seen them as a AWS-wrapping hosting company, who
         | funds some react projects on the side and will drop them at a
         | moment's notice.
         | 
         | Netlify, who bought Gatsby on its decline, still seems to be
         | going alright without being a frontend tooling company.
        
       | dimitrisnl wrote:
       | I have heard great things about astro, but my experience with
       | Gatsby keeps me away. I would much rather keep an SSR framework
       | like Remix and handle whatever pipeline is needed myself. No
       | magic.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | I felt the same way! But I came around. Take a look at the
         | source code for a component [1]. The .astro format is pretty
         | much just TS, CSS, and HTML. I don't even need React anymore.
         | Way less glue code and dependencies than with Gatsby. There is
         | a configuration file and some abstractions for things like
         | collections, but almost everything is opt-in.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://github.com/jwngr/jwn.gr/blob/master/src/components/b...
        
           | dimitrisnl wrote:
           | It looks great, but that's a DSL I must learn and re-use
           | nowhere else.
        
             | cpursley wrote:
             | There's not really any DSL. You just put some TS in the
             | frontmatter for fetching/transforming at build time, TS in
             | a script tab (if needed) and the html is just basic
             | templating that takes props.
        
       | ulrischa wrote:
       | Astro is a step in the right direction. But I wonder why in 2024
       | we still have to deal with proprietary component languages? I
       | would like something like Astro with web components. Perhaps with
       | the help of lit. With this the pure markdown content could be
       | easily enriched with components.
        
         | mdhb wrote:
         | This is my dream also. I much much prefer lit-html syntax to
         | Astro's.
         | 
         | I even found standard declarative shadow dom style components
         | to be a pain in the ass in Astro which left a bad taste in my
         | mouth since that's literally just stock standard HTML.
        
       | toinewx wrote:
       | Cannot use React UI lib with Astro such as Mantine. With Gatsby
       | it was possible.
       | 
       | Astro is MPA while Gatsby provided SPA-like navigation.
       | 
       | That's why Astro is not really a replacement.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Not a full replacement in all scenarios. But for my personal
         | website with a basic blog, Astro is by far the simpler and more
         | maintainable option. I bet that is true for most people here
         | who maintain their own personal website.
        
         | jaredcwhite wrote:
         | You could just slap on any library like Swup.js, Turbo, etc.
         | and get SPA-like fast navigation out of a regular "MPA" Astro
         | site. And that's true for any MPA, actually.
         | 
         | In addition, I believe Astro now has their own solution for
         | this, though I haven't tried it personally:
         | https://docs.astro.build/en/guides/view-transitions/
        
         | cmgriffing wrote:
         | This is a bit misleading. You are only prevented from using UI
         | libs that use a Provider/Context (like Mantine does) since
         | Astro does not support Context.
         | 
         | Things like shadcn/ui work fine, even when statically rendered.
        
         | kcrwfrd_ wrote:
         | You can achieve SPA-like navigation in Astro with their
         | transitions API, but if that's what you're after it's better to
         | use Next.js or Remix IMO.
         | 
         | (I helped build playboy.com/magazine with Astro, which uses the
         | transitions API for this SPA-like behavior... as well as
         | playboy.com/app with Next.js)
        
       | dceddia wrote:
       | Astro is great. I love that I can mix and match between markdown,
       | plain HTML, and Svelte components as needed (and even intermix
       | them within a page). Pretty much the sweet spot I always wanted
       | for a blog or marketing site: 98% static stuff, 2% sprinkles of
       | JS.
       | 
       | In early experiments it feels like Inertia.js be this same
       | feeling but for Rails and Laravel.
       | 
       | I never got very far on the Gatsby train. It always felt so slow
       | and fragile during local dev, and while GraphQL was cool it felt
       | like total overkill for most of the data I needed to grab
       | (like... markdown files from disk).
        
       | rpastuszak wrote:
       | This looks lovely! I've been recently working on sth similar:
       | building a custom pipeline from my Obsidian notes into a website
       | (untested.sonnet.io).
       | 
       | I ended up using 11ty because I wanted to stick as close to the
       | web platform as possible, but a part of me wishes I had tried
       | Astro as well. Mainly because I feel that it strikes the right
       | balance when it comes to flexibility and boilerplate. 11ty is
       | lovely, but there was soooo much stuff I had to write from
       | scratch. I feel like it paid off, but it took me much longer than
       | I had hoped.
       | 
       | One surprising side effect: I noticed that the site worked faster
       | online than served from localhost. 5 minutes of digging after I
       | remembered that it's served via HTTP2 w. multiplexing. I'm not
       | even interested in adding a bundler/minify step, just plain
       | CSS/HTML and asset optimisation w. 11ty-image is enough.
        
         | azangru wrote:
         | Plus one for eleventy. Love its minimalism and flexibility,
         | although it means that there isn't a clear guidance on assets
         | management. It's a shame that the web still doesn't have a
         | standard way of authoring components, and different frameworks
         | and static-site generators, including eleventy, have to invent
         | their own.
        
       | skwee357 wrote:
       | Astro is amazing! I use it for all my blogs, my personal website,
       | and some of my landing pages (info in about).
       | 
       | It's very easy to build a static website with zero js, or pick
       | the desired framework you want to work with.
       | 
       | Pair it with TypeScript and you get almost 100% type safe
       | templating and resulting websites.
        
       | orf wrote:
       | Astro is fantastic. I initially used NextJS with MDX, and
       | something simple like using relative markdown links to images was
       | utterly impossible.
       | 
       | I remember going down a day long rabbit hole to understand why,
       | and it boiled down to content layer, MDX and NextJS using
       | different, incompatible module loaders, bundlers or transpilers
       | of some kind[1][2][3]. Ridiculous. And don't get me started on
       | the image component.
       | 
       | In the end, Astro just works. No need for React (unless you want
       | it), it's simple, fast and produces a static site you can use
       | without JavaScript.
       | 
       | Data fetching is also utterly trivial, so you can have a fully
       | static site with "live" data pulled in at compile time.
       | 
       | I recommend it to anyone with frontend fatigue.
       | 
       | 1. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63957018/how-to-use-
       | imag...
       | 
       | 2. https://mmazzarolo.com/blog/2023-07-30-nextjs-mdx-image-
       | sour...
       | 
       | 3. https://github.com/contentlayerdev/contentlayer/issues/11
        
         | indigodaddy wrote:
         | Nice summary! Any guides you'd suggest for someone new to all
         | of this, in terms of getting a simple blog set up with Astro?
        
           | orf wrote:
           | The getting started docs[1] are really good, I'd recommend
           | starting there for sure.
           | 
           | Basically you just run a few commands and you've got a
           | website. Edit the Astro files to put HTML in, don't worry
           | about any JavaScript.
           | 
           | Then try adding a simple "site header" component and using
           | that.
           | 
           | 1. https://docs.astro.build/en/tutorial/1-setup/2/
        
       | remipch wrote:
       | I don't know if it has its place here but for a minimalist static
       | website, here is my approach:
       | 
       | - create a simple html template using simple.css [0]
       | 
       | - write markdown files
       | 
       | - wrap pandoc [1] in a simple bash script to manually convert
       | markdown to html
       | 
       | - and that's it.
       | 
       | By minimalist, I mean: no script, no component, no database, no
       | react, no SEO.
       | 
       | The result is a minimalist website that you write in markdown.
       | 
       | It's very limited compared to full-featured frameworks, but it
       | can do the job for a simple website.
       | 
       | Here is mine: [2] (I'm not a web developer at all).
       | 
       | [0] https://github.com/kevquirk/simple.css
       | 
       | [1] https://pandoc.org/
       | 
       | [2] https://remipch.github.io/
        
         | syndicatedjelly wrote:
         | My personal website was originally written this way. The
         | compile and build script was about 20 lines of shell scripting
         | (relying on pandoc), and could have probably been reduced
         | further. It worked very well and I stuck with it for about 2
         | years before moving on to Hugo. It was a good experience to
         | hand-roll all the components of a static site, and something
         | every web dev should be required to do early in their career.
        
         | indigodaddy wrote:
         | I quite like your philosophy and approach
        
         | dartos wrote:
         | Idk if I'd call my setup minimalist, but I write blog posts in
         | org, and use ox-Hugo to export them to hugo.
         | 
         | I like hugo.
         | 
         | Good tempting language and taxonomy features.
        
       | todotask wrote:
       | I spent the entire time building a business network platform with
       | Astro instead of WordPress or other web frameworks because it is
       | exactly what I need to easily manage UI components and provide a
       | safer JSX-like environment.
       | 
       | In comparison to Ruby on Rails, Django, and Laravel, Astro stands
       | on the same level but much less learning curve.
        
       | jama_ wrote:
       | Fully concur with the points you made. I also just finished
       | transitioning my personal website to Astro from an Eleventy setup
       | that I got too lazy to maintain. I made a couple of landing pages
       | for clients and my own projects with Astro and the maintenance
       | experience was eye-opening.
       | 
       | Astro really is quite wondrous. If you don't stray too far from
       | its opinionated route, it's almost magical. But some more
       | advanced things do still take some tinkering. My sitemap and RSS
       | with full text setups I wouldn't describe as the most elegant
       | things in existence, but they do their job.
       | 
       | What I'm still lacking/wondering about is whether there's a CDN
       | static site/serverless hosting provider like Netlify, Vercel or
       | Cloudflare, but that isn't free or $20/mo. I'd like to pay for a
       | good service that obviously has running costs, but I don't
       | believe there's quite something like those.
       | 
       | Anyway, I like the website. It's easy on the eyes.
        
         | jwngr wrote:
         | Thanks for sharing! I use Fireabse Hosting, which I guess gets
         | grouped in with the other services you mentioned. It's free,
         | has a lightweight devX, and integrates with CI via GitHub
         | actions for preview and production builds [1].
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://github.com/jwngr/jwn.gr/tree/master/.github/workflow...
        
           | jama_ wrote:
           | Right, I didn't consider Google. The 360MB/day of free egress
           | traffic (Spark plan) strike me as very peculiar. But at least
           | it isn't Cloudflare's "unlimited" with secret limits in
           | place, or Netlify's 100GB/month and then enormous costs on
           | everything above.
           | 
           | Thanks for reminding me! I'll give Firebase a look.
           | 
           | By the way, very minor thing I noticed. Clicking on your
           | photo on the homepage swaps backgrounds, but the timer-based
           | swapping still runs on its fixed interval. Can look
           | unpolished if you click it a bunch or in the wrong moment.
        
             | jwngr wrote:
             | Oh, thanks for letting me know! Looks like I'm not properly
             | clearing the interval. I'll get that fixed.
        
       | SrslyJosh wrote:
       | > Astro is designed as a Multi-Page Application (MPA) by default,
       | shipping minimal JavaScript and delivering static HTML via full
       | page reloads.
       | 
       | So...a website. _weary emoji_
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-26 23:01 UTC)