hugo-coder

Pros of hugo-theme-terminal

• Unique, retro-style terminal aesthetic that stands out
• Built-in dark mode support
• More customization options for colors and fonts

Cons of hugo-theme-terminal

• Less mobile-friendly design compared to hugo-coder
• Fewer built-in shortcodes and content types
• Steeper learning curve for customization

Code Comparison

hugo-theme-terminal:

<header class="header">
  <div class="header__inner">
    <div class="header__logo">
      {{ partial "logo.html" . }}
    </div>
    {{ partial "menu.html" . }}
  </div>
</header>

hugo-coder:

<header class="header">
  <nav class="navigation">
    <section class="container">
      {{ partial "header.html" . }}
    </section>
  </nav>
</header>

The code snippets show differences in structure and naming conventions between the two themes. hugo-theme-terminal uses more nested elements and BEM-like class naming, while hugo-coder has a simpler structure with semantic HTML tags.

Pros of hello-friend-ng

• More customization options for color schemes and layouts
• Built-in support for multilingual content
• Enhanced social media integration with more icon options

Cons of hello-friend-ng

• Slightly more complex configuration due to additional features
• May require more tweaking to achieve a minimalist look
• Potentially higher learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

hello-friend-ng (config.toml):

[params]
  # Custom CSS
  customCSS = ["css/custom.css"]
  
  # Social Icons
  [[params.social]]
    name = "twitter"
    url  = "https://twitter.com/username"

hugo-coder (config.toml):

[params]
  # Custom CSS
  custom_css = ["css/custom.css"]
  
  # Social Icons
  [[params.social]]
    name = "Twitter"
    icon = "fa fa-twitter fa-2x"
    weight = 1
    url = "https://twitter.com/username"

Both themes offer customization options, but hello-friend-ng provides more built-in features and flexibility in terms of layout and design. However, hugo-coder maintains a simpler, more minimalist approach that may be preferable for users seeking a clean and straightforward design. The code comparison shows slight differences in configuration syntax, with hello-friend-ng using a more streamlined approach for social media icons.

Pros of PaperMod

• More customization options and features, including dark mode and search functionality
• Faster loading times due to optimized code and minimal design
• Better SEO optimization out of the box

Cons of PaperMod

• Steeper learning curve for beginners due to more complex configuration options
• Less minimalistic design, which may not suit all users' preferences

Code Comparison

PaperMod:

params:
  env: production
  description: "Theme PaperMod - https://github.com/adityatelange/hugo-PaperMod"
  author: Theme PaperMod
  defaultTheme: auto
  ShowReadingTime: true
  ShowShareButtons: true

Coder:

[params]
  author = "John Doe"
  info = "Full Stack DevOps and Magician"
  description = "John Doe's personal website"
  keywords = "blog,developer,personal"
  avatarurl = "images/avatar.jpg"

PaperMod offers more built-in features and customization options in its configuration, while Coder focuses on simplicity and essential information. PaperMod's YAML configuration allows for more complex structures, whereas Coder uses TOML for a straightforward setup.

Pros of Ananke

• More visually striking design with large hero images and bold typography
• Built-in support for multiple content types (posts, projects, etc.)
• Includes social sharing buttons and related content features

Cons of Ananke

• Less customization options compared to Hugo Coder
• Heavier theme with more CSS and JavaScript, potentially impacting load times
• Steeper learning curve for beginners due to more complex structure

Code Comparison

Hugo Coder (partial for social icons):

{{ range . }}
  <li>
    <a href="{{ .url }}" aria-label="{{ .name }}" {{ .rel | default "me" | printf "rel=%q" | safeHTMLAttr }}>
      {{ partial "icon.html" .icon }}
    </a>
  </li>
{{ end }}

Ananke (partial for social icons):

{{ with .Param "ananke_socials" }}
{{ range . }}
  <a href="{{ .url }}" target="_blank" class="{{ .name }} ananke-social-link link-transition stackoverflow link dib z-999 pt3 pt0-l mr1" title="{{ .name }} link" rel="noopener" aria-label="follow on {{ .name }}——Opens in a new window">
    {{ $icon := (printf "svg/ananke-socials/%s.svg" .name) }}
    {{ with resources.Get $icon }}
      {{ .Content | safeHTML }}
    {{ end }}
  </a>
{{ end }}
{{ end }}

The code comparison shows that Ananke uses more complex markup and styling for social icons, while Hugo Coder opts for a simpler approach. This reflects the overall design philosophy of each theme.

Pros of Hermit

• More minimalist and lightweight design
• Built-in dark mode support
• Better out-of-the-box SEO optimization

Cons of Hermit

• Less customization options
• Fewer content types supported (e.g., no portfolio section)
• Limited multilingual support compared to Hugo-Coder

Code Comparison

Hermit (config.toml):

[params]
  dateform        = "Jan 2, 2006"
  dateformShort   = "Jan 2"
  dateformNum     = "2006-01-02"
  dateformNumTime = "2006-01-02 15:04"

Hugo-Coder (config.toml):

[params]
  author = "John Doe"
  info = "Full Stack DevOps and Magician"
  description = "John Doe's personal website"
  keywords = "blog,developer,personal"

Both themes use similar configuration structures, but Hermit focuses more on date formatting options, while Hugo-Coder emphasizes author and site information. Hugo-Coder generally offers more extensive customization options throughout its configuration file.

Hermit is ideal for those seeking a minimalist, performance-oriented theme with built-in dark mode. Hugo-Coder, on the other hand, provides more flexibility and features for users who want a more customizable and feature-rich theme, especially for multilingual sites or those requiring diverse content types.