Part of learning something new is mulling over an idea.
I didn’t do that right away, and that was a mistake I do not regret.
I could have arrived at this very same understanding if I had
However, this is all in hindsight.
I know that new tools and technology are potentially going to be around forever and that early adoption of them, even if a huge pain, can be a boon.
I convinced myself that it’s the same to contemplate an idea, specifically using the rubber-duck method, where one speaks it out loud to an object.
Equivocating that to prompting AI with the elements generated an answer that was eventually close to something that resembled a choice I might make.
So, here I am actually not thinking about going from the colossal mountain that is the functionality of Hugo(read Go):
to the procedural scripting of Python:
In the past I would have figured out myself instead of leaning on AI–not just because it didn’t exist–to figure out exactly what is the point-of-entry that is a placeholder for the Hugo alternative.
Rather than immediately building the site generator in GoLang, I could potentially, significantly benefit from first building something (a project) that lacks exceptional performance.
The reward is that it also creates a stepping stone not just for me, but for anyone starting from scratch(almost nothing) or from the same point I am.
That point is scripting a copy-and-paste process that accomplishes the same static site generation without featuring the functionality of Go.
I want to mark a trail which others can follow from point A to point B
A Python Script, which when it’s ran will generate the static website.
I don’t have further details at this time, but like this post’s title implies that was not my goal.
I met today’s goal of finding the true start.
This start is specifically for the coding portion of the project, but there will certainly be other true starts for:
Take Care!
Thomas Custer