anderspitman.net

Discover this repository through its Hacker News conversations.

Explore on GitHub Read Hacker News discussions

3Distinct people

5Mentions

0Explicit recommenders

1GitHub stars

REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A public description has not been verified.

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 7:56:55 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by day5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2020-01-13 20:48:32 UTC to 2020-01-21 22:18:14 UTC.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges

UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
Period	Start (UTC)	End (exclusive, UTC)	Mentions	Comments
Jan 13	2020-01-13 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-14 00:00:00 UTC	4	4
Jan 14	2020-01-14 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-15 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 15	2020-01-15 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-16 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 16	2020-01-16 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-17 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 17	2020-01-17 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-18 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 18	2020-01-18 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-19 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 19	2020-01-19 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-20 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 20	2020-01-20 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-21 00:00:00 UTC	0	0
Jan 21	2020-01-21 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-22 00:00:00 UTC	1	1

What Hacker News says

4 sources

danShumway·Jan 13, 2020

Even without adding a build step, would you be willing to add a <noscript> tag to your index.html that just linked to the Github repo in general? It wouldn't even need to be specific to each individual post. While admittedly some readers here are purely focusing on the irony of supporting "the primitive, simple case", for the most part non-JS users are willing to meet sites halfway on this. I'm totally fine manually navigating a Github repo to get at posts, I wouldn't be irritated at all in that situation, I wouldn't have even commented. Right now, your site offers nothing. Even just the below markup would have been sufficient -- it wouldn't need to be customized per-page. <noscript> <div>This site requires Javascript to function. You can view the raw text of posts on <a href="https://github.com/anderspitman/anderspitman.net">Github

Read the rest

</a>.</div> </noscript> Just give users something, literally anything they can use to recover when your expected use-case fails.

In Please make your products work with URLs

anderspitman·Jan 13, 2020

Author here. Sorry for those having trouble viewing the site. That's obviously never the intention. The current incarnation is actually a bit of an experiment. Unfortunately, my blog is only occasionally tested against front page traffic so I don't always get a feel for what's not working. That said, I assure you I am intimately familiar with the tradeoffs of different methods of delivering HTML. TL;DR it's my personal site and I'll do what I want with it. It's for fun. The previous version of this site used a static site generator I wrote myself[0]. I switched to client-side JS rendering for several reasons. First, having a build step creates a dependency on both the build tool and a specific action. If you clone my blog[1] (with submodules) you should be able to host it exactly as-is from the repo. No build step required. I hold a fairl

Read the rest

y extreme view[2] on dependencies. Second, I wanted user interactions within my site to be very fast[3]. After the initial load, subsequent navigations are much faster (and consistent) than retrieving a new static HTML page. Obviously once the HTML is cached that's no longer true, but I'm optimizing for first-time visitors. Though I should give more consideration to the fact that most of you are only going to look at the one linked page. Also, I plan to eventually add some quirky little things to the site which require maintaining state between navigations. For example, I thought it would be fun to integrate a little 2D adventure game with a character you can move around to scroll the content. EDIT: I should also acknowledge that while I defend the use of JS on my site, I concede that supporting non-JS use cases would be far more true to supporting "the simple case" as fallback. Simply supporting browsers in the default configuration isn't a very high bar. Browsers are incredibly complicated VMs. I would actually argue that my text-heavy content should be accessible via curl, like my other[4] projects[5]. I've never tried making a site browseable with curl before. That might be a fun experiment. EDIT2: <noscript> should be working now, with a link to the raw content on GitHub, per danShumway's suggestion (thanks Dan!). [0] https://github.com/anderspitman/assg [1] https://github.com/anderspitman/anderspitman.net [2] https://anderspitman.net/11/dependencies/ [3] https://anderspitman.net/13/64-ms/ [4] https://patchbay.pub/ [5] https://emauth.io/

In Please make your products work with URLs

jefftk·Jan 13, 2020

Ah, you're right: https://github.com/anderspitman/anderspitman.net/blob/master... Yes, if you're going to have a build process, converting Markdown to HTML server-side makes a lot more sense.

In Please make your products work with URLs

danShumway·Jan 13, 2020

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anderspitman/anderspitman.... Note for OP: The reason this breaks without Javascript is because it's rendering the Markdown clientside. That could be moved to part of the build process without increasing your hosting requirements at all. I can see that you already have https://github.com/anderspitman/anderspitman.net/blob/master... started, so I'm assuming you know this already and that you just haven't had the time to set up rendering on build yet. It's not my intention to preach to the choir. If you're struggling to figure out how to get this working as a SPA while still including content for non-JS users, my advice would be to include the rendered HTML in each index.html and just hide it with CSS during page load. You can still use AJAX for all of your subsequent navigation to avoid reloading the page,

Read the rest

but if the static HTML is annotated with the correct links and content, people who request a specific URL without Javascript would still get to read. Or you could even get fancy and skip hiding it on the initial page load, only swapping it out with AJAX for future navigation, and this would make your initial page load even faster than it currently is.

In Please make your products work with URLs