Posts tagged with "Python"

I wasn't intending to make any changes to BlogMore today, but as luck would have it @andyc had a feature request which made sense and seemed easy enough to prompt for, so I did.

So the change is this: if you happen to configure BlogMore such that the post URLs end up being something that ends in index.html, if you turn on clean_urls, all emitted URLs will leave off the index.html. The result of this is that a URL that would look like:

https://blog.example.com/posts/my-first-post/index.html

can then always look like:

https://blog.example.com/posts/my-first-post/

In other words: it gives you a way to have clean URLs.

This is carried through all generated pages and the sitemap too.

It's not something I'd personally use for this blog (because it's been around long enough and has a specific URL layout that I want to keep working) but I can see it being useful for any future project, and of course I can see it being useful for anyone else wanting to use BlogMore.

Another wee change is to make sure that the rebuild-on-change feature of the local test server always loads any new values set in the configuration file. While it was reacting to some properties changing, it wasn't reacting to all; so I asked Copilot to check all the values and make sure all are handled.

Another day, another tweak to BlogMore. This bump adds a couple of features relating to headings. The main change being that I've added support for custom IDs for links. To borrow from the docs:

If you need a specific id — for example because the auto-generated one is too long, or because you want a stable id that won't change if you reword the heading — you can set it explicitly by appending {#your-id} to the end of the heading line:

### My Great Heading {#custom-id}

This produces:

<h3 id="custom-id">My Great Heading</h3>

The custom id overrides the auto-generated one. Headings without a {#…} suffix keep their auto-generated IDs as usual.

Headings, of course, have a default "slugged" ID if a custom one isn't provided.

The other main change is that it's now easier for a reader to discover a link to a heading should they want to link someone to a specific part of a post or page. Again, to borrow from the docs:

To make it easy for readers to share a link to a specific section, BlogMore renders a small ¶ symbol at the end of every heading. The symbol is invisible by default and appears when the reader moves the mouse over the heading. Clicking the symbol navigates the browser to that heading's URL fragment, where the address can be copied from the browser's location bar.

The anchor appears and disappears with a smooth fade and does not affect the layout of the page in any way.

Another small change I added was to the "Generated by BlogMore" text that appears at the bottom of every generated page. I always think it's nice if some tool lets you turn that sort of thing off, and I'd not paid attention to that yet. So as of v1.12.0 you can add this to the configuration file:

with_advert: false

and you then don't have to have that at the bottom of each page.

Credit BlogMore if you want, but you don't have to.

I was going to call this one "Yet more BlogMore" but I think, even after two posts with that naming scheme, the "...more BlogMore" thing has had its day. But here I am: another day, another wee change to the blogging engine I'm building as an experiment with developing using AI.

Just a couple of simple changes in this release. The first comes from the fact that I was updating my blog to include more of the "socials" icons (the ones you'll see towards the bottom of the sidebar if you're on a wide enough display, or in the collapsible header if not) and when I deployed some were missing. Which, after a moment of puzzling, made sense.

See: I made a change a while back such that I stopped using the full FontAwesome stylesheet, and instead only used a specially-built subset. This is handy in that it really reduces how much data goes into a page. But the downside, of course, is the browser will cache this file; so if you then add more "brands" to the list their icons will be missing until the cached version of the old generation of the CSS file goes stale.

So in this release I've added a generation-based cache buster; it's just the simple ?v=thing approach but it should work fine for what I need here.

The other change is I've added the generated FontAwesome CSS file to the list of files that get optionally minified at generation time. While it's not a massive change in terms of the total amount of data that gets pulled down, every little helps.

I feel like, at this point, I've managed to add everything I could possibly want from this little static site generator; yet somehow each day I have a new idea and off I go again.

It'll be finished soon. I'm sure.

While the additions have, for sure, slowed down, I'm still tinkering away with BlogMore. Recent changes stem from the fact that someone else has been mad enough to want to experiment with rebuilding their blog with it too, which, if I'm honest, is massively helpful with the ongoing GitHub Copilot experiment. Somehow it feels a little different, ganging up with the agent to implement changes for someone else's benefit.

Recent changes include:

• Tweaking the size and layout of the "social" icons that appear in the sidebar (this one was for my benefit)
• Making it possible to customise the title for the socials section in the sidebar (also for my benefit)
• Providing control over the path used for posts -- this one was a request that made a ton of sense, it's at this point it stops being a tool for me and starts being a more general tool

Next up is the first breaking change where I'm going to remove a feature. This came from my very initial experiment last month, where I was concentrating purely on building a tool for my blog and my blog alone. I'd made it such that the /attachments directory in the content directory had special status, and it would be copied over to the output directory in full. Oddly, however, this never made it into the documentation.

Meanwhile, the /extras directory also had special status with its content, full hierarchy included, being copied over but moved up one level in the output. So, for example, extras/humans.txt became /humans.txt in the resulting site, etc.

Presumably, at this point, you can see where this is going. Why the heck did I have a special attachments folder being copied over, when a folder of any name could live below extras and also get copied over?

So, now, my blog, which uses /attachments for all inline images and covers, has been updated so that the attachments live under extras and it all works as it did before; no special messing with a special folder name.

Given all this, the next release of BlogMore will remove treating /attachments as a special case, making it less hard-coded for my habits and more of a general tool that could be useful for others.

Mildly related to this: I did a lunchtime talk at work today, having turned Five days with Copilot into a 20-25 minute presentation. It was fun to do. I've not written or given a talk or presentation in a long time -- probably the last time was when I helped run Newton's Astronomical Society in the early 2000s -- so the preparation for this was a little daunting to start with.

While doing this, not wanting to break a long streak of never having used PowerPoint, I discovered and gave sli.dev a go. Writing a single Markdown file to power the talk was exactly my kind of approach. I don't have any experience with any other such tools, but if you're ever looking for something like this I recommend giving it a try.

I'm also open to suggestions of other options, given I might end up doing this some more.

I've just released v1.7.0 of BlogMore, my ongoing experiment with GitHub Copilot. Since the last release I wrote about I've made a couple of cosmetic changes, and also addressed a couple of bugs.

The first cosmetic change relates to how the blog appears on mobile devices¹. In such a circumstance, before the change, the sidebar content would, by design, relocate to the top of the page. This made sense, it meant that the information was still available, but it also had the unfortunate effect of pushing the actual post content way down the screen, sometimes off the bottom of the screen.

Not great.

So I decided to try and improve the mobile layout. As I have done so many times now, I started out with an issue that served as a prompt and assigned it to Copilot; despite the fairly vague request and the fact that I gave it an image to consider, and essentially gave it a hand-waved ASCII diagram of what I wanted, it mostly managed to one-shot the problem.

Now, when I visit the site on my phone, I see a lot less "admin" stuff at the start.

As a reader I can still toggle the "sidebar" information into view and out of the way again, but the important thing is I can get into the post itself right away.

Another change that's mostly cosmetic, although has a purpose too, is an index in the archive page. I've created this to only be available on wider displays; a tool to make use of any "dead" space on the right hand side of the page. This gives a table of contents of years and months so the reader can skip around the archives faster.

There have been some under-the-hood changes too. One was an effort to reduce the repeated boilerplate that I noticed was creeping into the templates. While I'm mainly building this tool for myself and the "out of the box" design is how I want my blog to look, I do want the templates to be usable and as efficient and as easy to modify as possible.

As mentioned earlier, there's also been a couple of bug fixes; one example being tackling some misbehaviour on GNU/Linux when it comes to site generation. That issue was an interesting one in that I wasn't able to reproduce the problem, so I decided to let Copilot have at it and make its best deduction. From what I can tell it came through (I still need confirmation that it has solved the problem; but it does seem to have identified an actual edge-case that was worth taking care of).

At this point I'd also like to give a shout out to @andyc. He's been a great source of testing and feedback as I've been toying with this experiment. While I set out to build a useful tool for me and me alone, he's raised a few good issues that should push it in the direction of being of more general use.

I highly recommend having a read of his post reviewing a good number of static site generators. As I keep tinkering with BlogMore I'll be keeping this post in mind.

While I've written a lot of documentation in my life, it's not something I enjoy. I want documentation to read well, I want documentation to be useful, I want documentation to be accurate. I also want there to be documentation at all and sometimes the other parts mean it doesn't get done for FOSS projects¹.

When I started the experiment that is BlogMore, I very quickly hashed out some ideas on how it might generate some documentation, and the result was okay. In fact, if anything, it was a bit too much and there was a lot of repeated information.

So, this morning, before I sat down for the day's work, I quickly wrote an issue that would act as a prompt to Copilot to rewrite the documentation. This time I tried to be very clear about what I wanted where, but also left it to work out all the details.

The result genuinely impressed me. While I'll admit I haven't read it all in detail (and because of this have left the same warning right at the start), on the surface it looks a lot clearer and feels like a better journey to learning how to use BlogMore.

blogmore.davep.dev hosts the result of this.

I have a plan to work through the documentation and be sure it's all correct and all makes sense, but if it's as correct and as useful as I think, I might have to consider the idea of taking this approach more often. Writing down the plan for the documentation and then letting it appear in the background while I get on with my actual day makes a lot of sense.

I fear I might be warming to these tools, a little bit. :-/

Since switching over on the 19th of last month I've been making lots of changes to BlogMore. While there's been a good few bug fixes and QoL changes, I've also been adding new features that I've found myself wanting.

Here's a list of some of the significant additions I've added in the last couple of weeks (and, yes, as per the experiment, all of these have been developed by me prompting GitHub Copilot):

• All parts of a date in a post's timestamp can be clicked to get to an archive of that point in time.
• Added fully-client-side full text search (I'm finding this especially useful).
• Added sitemap generation.
• Added a general fallback description for any page that doesn't have one.
• Added fallback keywords for any page that doesn't have any.
• Added author metadata to the header of all pages.
• Hugely optimised the use of FontAwesome.
• Made best possible use of all the usual og: type metadata in the head of all pages.
• Added optional CSS minification, improving page load times.
• Added optional JavaScript minification, improving page load times.
• Where appropriate, all pages now have rel="prev" and rel="next" tags in the <head>.
• Added a rel="canonical" tag to the <head> of all pages.
• Improved the style and workings of the pagination of all archive type pages.
• Improved the cosmetics of the category and tag clouds.
• Improved how the first paragraph is discovered for a page or post, when using it as the default description in the <head> of a page.
• Cleaned up the generated HTML so it's more compact.
• Added support for custom 404 pages.

As I say, they're just the improvements I've made that have come to mind as I've used BlogMore. I've also done a lot of bug fixing too. You can read the full changelog over on the BlogMore website¹.

I feel that the pace of updates and additions has started to slow; I think I've now got more or less everything I wanted from this. I'm pretty sure I can do everything I ever bothered to do with Jekyll and Pelican, and I am enjoying "owning" the code such that, if I have an idea for something I want, it's easy enough to make it happen.

I'm also pretty happy with how well the results perform. Despite the fact I'm not a web developer, and despite this blog being served by GitHub Pages (which, let's be honest, isn't the most speedy host), the measurements for a single page in the blog look fairly good:

That's measuring loading in a desktop context. Even measured as mobile (which I've tried to make work well too) it's not too shabby:

I think I can rightfully be satisfied with those values, given this isn't normally my primary focus when it comes to software development.

Anyway, if you like messing with static site generators, and one that is blog-centric sounds useful, and if you're not put off by the fact that this is a deliberate "use GitHub Copilot" experiment, feel free to take a look.

I've just released v1.3.0 of Hike, my little terminal-based Markdown browser. It's about a year now since I made the first release and I've been making the odd update here and there, but mostly it's a pretty stable tool. There's a few other things I'd like to do with it but I keep getting distracted by different ideas.

Today's release sort of rides on the coattails of the current love for all things Markdown because of "the AI". It seems that some folk are now keen on the idea of serving Markdown from their websites, when asked for it: as you can see in this post for example. While that might be handy for some LLM bot or whatever, it's also pretty handy if you happen to have a web-friendly Markdown browser!

So v1.3.0 makes a small change to how a URL is looked at when deciding if it might be a Markdown document, by saying "hey, web server, I like Markdown more than anything else, so feel free to serve me that up". If we get a Markdown type back, we go ahead and load it into Hike.

This means that the post mentioned above loads up just fine now:

Previously, Hike would have gone "nah, that's not a Markdown document" and would have handed off to the environment's web browser.

Hike is licensed GPL-3.0 and available via GitHub and also via PyPi. If you have an environment that has pipx installed you should be able to get up and going with:

pipx install hike

If you're more into uv:

uv tool install hike

If you don't have uv installed you can use uvx.sh to perform the installation. For GNU/Linux or macOS or similar:

curl -LsSf uvx.sh/hike/install.sh | sh

or on Windows:

powershell -ExecutionPolicy ByPass -c "irm https://uvx.sh/hike/install.ps1 | iex"

One thing I've been noticing with my current experiment with GitHub Copilot is that it seems to know Python well enough to write code that gets the job done, and sometimes it knows it well enough to write more modern idiomatic Python code, but it also seems to write the inelegant version of it.

It's hard to pin down exactly, and of course it's a matter of taste (my idea of elegant might burn someone else's eyes), but on occasion, as I review the code, I find things that make me go "ugh".

Here's an example: there's a function that Copilot wrote to extract the first non-markup paragraph of an article (so that it can be used as a page description). One thing it needs to do is skip any initial images, etc. It takes a pretty brute force approach of looking at the start of each stripped line, but it gets the job done -- I can't really argue with that.

But here's how it does it:

# Skip markdown image syntax
if stripped.startswith("!["):
    continue

# Skip markdown linked image syntax ([![alt](img)](url))
if stripped.startswith("[!["):
    continue

# Skip HTML img tags
if stripped.startswith("<img"):
    continue

Now, this is good: it's using startswith. There are less-elegant approaches it could have used so I'll give it bonus points for using that method. The thing is though, it's testing each prefix one string at a time, pretty much rolling out a load of boilerplate code.

What bothers me here is that startswith will take a tuple of strings to test for. I find it curious that the generated code is idiomatic enough to know that startswith is a sensible option here, but at the same time it still writes the list of things to test out in a long-winded way.

This is exactly the sort of thing I'd call out in a normal code review. Technically, if this wasn't mostly a "let's see how it goes about this with minimal input from me" experiment, I'd have called it out here too (as an experiment, I might go back prompt it to "think" about this).

If I ever find myself using this sort of tool for generating code in a work setting, this is exactly the sort of thing I'll be watching for.

I've just released v1.1.0 of Complexitty, my little Mandelbrot explorer for the terminal. I first released it in April last year and have tinkered with it on and off since. Most of the changes have been to do with easier navigation, some additional colour schemes, the ability to pass location information on the command line, that sort of thing; meanwhile, the very heart of it has stayed the same "it's as fast as it's ever going to be expect it to not be fast" approach.

It's a Python application after all: they can be fast, but something like this isn't going to compete with the serious Mandelbrot explorers.

v1.1.0, however, has a little optional speedup. If you install it normally it'll work at the pace it always did: the more you zoom in, the more you ramp up the iterations to tease more detail out, the slower it gets. But now: if you install it as complexitty[faster] rather than just as complexitty it will use Numba to speed up the main calculation.

On the very first run things will be slow to start up, but from then on I see a real improvement. As you zoom in and explore and up the detail, the calculation remains pretty fast. The drop-off of speed that you see without Numba just isn't there.

While the whole idea of Complexitty was to see what I could do with Python, in the terminal, using Textual, and keeping it "pure", I feel this is an acceptable "cheat" given it's optional.

I'm considering this an experimental change for now, as I don't know how well it will work in all places where Complexitty could be otherwise installed. So give it a go, see if it installs and runs as complexitty[faster], and if it doesn't: fall back to plain old complexitty.

If you're interested you can find the source over on GitHub, with the application available via PyPI. If you use pipx you should be able to install with either:

pipx install complexitty[faster]

or

pipx install complexitty

If you're a fan of uv (and who isn't these days?) then try either:

uv tool install complexitty[faster]

or fall back to:

uv tool install complexitty

In fact, to squeeze everything you can out of Complexitty, perhaps try:

uv tool install complexitty[faster] --python 3.14