Hash-Based Routing vs Static Site Generation

Developers should use hash-based routing when building SPAs that need to support deep linking and browser history without server-side configuration, as it relies solely on client-side JavaScript and doesn't require server support for routing meets developers should use ssg for content-heavy sites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing pages where content changes infrequently, as it offers superior performance, security (no server-side vulnerabilities), and low hosting costs. Here's our take.

Hash-Based Routing

Nice Pick

Developers should use hash-based routing when building SPAs that need to support deep linking and browser history without server-side configuration, as it relies solely on client-side JavaScript and doesn't require server support for routing

Pros

• It's ideal for applications hosted on static file servers or CDNs where server-side routing isn't feasible, such as in GitHub Pages or simple web apps
• Related to: single-page-applications, javascript-routing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Static Site Generation

Developers should use SSG for content-heavy sites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing pages where content changes infrequently, as it offers superior performance, security (no server-side vulnerabilities), and low hosting costs

Pros

• It's ideal for projects requiring SEO optimization, global scalability via CDNs, and simplified deployment workflows, especially when combined with modern frameworks like Next
• Related to: next-js, gatsby

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Hash-Based Routing is a concept while Static Site Generation is a methodology. We picked Hash-Based Routing based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Hash-Based Routing wins

Based on overall popularity. Hash-Based Routing is more widely used, but Static Site Generation excels in its own space.