Astro 7.0
astro.build
astro.build
The TL;DR is that `marked` is very light, but a bit on the slower side compared to Sätteri and `markdown-it` (and its forks). I'm not sure how friendly the extensibility is, but Sätteri re-use the same AST format as the unified ecosystem, which might feel more friendly.
Both good options, though!
Crossing data between Rust and JS is inherently kinda slow (relatively), so there's a constant push and pull between flexibility and performance that's not always easy to reason about!
So I can use components, reuse stuff, include stuff etc, basically what I would do with PHP back in the days, but now it spits out a compiled page I can host for cheap (often even free). And easy to add in some interactivity when needed. Like I render a list as a component, and very easy to ship some dynamic filtering on the frontend using the same code, but the content is still statically in the html, so served fast and good SEO.
Astro has gone from 247 deps in v6 to 190 in v7.
I still have some plans in this area that should reduce the overall count further, though.
It’s just tedious at this point.
I'm personally awaiting the rewrite to assembly.
I also wish there could be a general purpose content processing API so I can plug a different format than markdown (such as typst)
See this example: https://stackblitz.com/edit/github-ug3paw61?file=src%2Fpages...
For my personal site, it was a 5 minute work, as usual :)
"Astro supports every major UI framework. Bring your existing components and take advantage of Astro's optimized client build performance."
But isn't Astro a framework itself? And then apparently you need Node as well. The frameworks upon frameworks in Web development are baffling.
Node is a runtime, not a framework.
So there's really only one framework here (Astro). Using other web frameworks within it is completely optional.
I have build several sites using Astro 6, and i am finding the ease of building the sites amazing and exceptional in SEO as well.
I just recently updated my website to Astro 6 and now... there's Astro 7. Maybe by the time I update, Astro 8 will be a few weeks in the future.
We're working on incremental builds which should help as well: https://github.com/withastro/roadmap/issues/1388
If yes, then this instability is a serious concern to me.
In practice, our users typically comment quite positively on how little (if any) work major updates requires, and we offer pretty extensive upgrade guides, if that helps.
Good that they added a tool to keep using rehype, but I’m unsure that it will last
The vast majority of our users don't use any sort of unified plugins, so a pipeline that's faster (and about 100 deps leaner) felt like a better default.
So, yes, it’s very widely used backend for modern typescript backends
My understanding is that astro isn't considered particularly slow?