Going by the response headers, it seems that most if not all of the HTML served by docs.mux.com consists of cacheable static files. As the OP article mentions, using React for static generation is one of the big use cases for RSC and Next.

Which templating technology would you recommend for the use case instead? Keep in mind that generating HTML from OpenAPI specs can become complex and will require plenty of maps, filters, recursion and indexing into the data in the course of transforming it into HTML.

> plenty of maps, filters, recursion and indexing into the data

Are there a lot of server side template languages that can’t do this?

This is straight-forward stuff.

> Are there a lot of server side template languages that can’t do this?

Did I say there weren't a lot of template languages that can do this?

A dead give-away that this subject isn't as "straight-forward" as you think is that, at one sentence in, you've already misidentified the conversation taking place. This isn't about can vs can't, but about the right tool for the job.

What template language would you personally recommend for this project?

classic ASP

Maintaining VBScript sucked 100x worse than TypeScript.

How would you approach SSG with Classic ASP?

You’re moving the goalposts to a whole new stadium.

Classic HN conversation here.

"The web is too complex! All these web frameworks are too complicated!"

"Okay, what do you suggest instead?"

"I'd just use [completely unmaintainable technology from the 90s that is no longer supported by its vendor]"

"Okay, how would you approach [basic feature of the web framework]?"

"Stop moving the goalposts!"

Come on, you could at least come up with some hand-waving about cache headers and CDNs.

You missed the classic, "I did this back in the 90s using x and it was more powerful and sane compared to any of this new malarkey"