When comparing Nanoc vs Hugo, the Slant community recommends Hugo for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Hugo is ranked 7th while Nanoc is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose Hugo is:
Code can be viewed [on GitHub](http://github.com/spf13/hugo).
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Flexibly built
Nanoc is a good choice if you need to support a site with a more complex structure than a simple blog. Nanoc is more agnostic to the types of pages you have, and allows you to do finer tuned refinements like customizing the URL structure.
Nanoc has a modular architecture which makes it easier to incorporate plugins and functionality from other projects as well as extend functionality.
Pro Helps you create multilingual sites
Nanoc takes multilingual sites into consideration and has features to make translations easier to implement.
Pro Unit testing integration
Nanoc has a check command to run tests against your site and make sure it meets requirements you define.
There are built in checks to validate HTML and CSS, as well as validating internal and external links.
Pro Works well with compile to languages
Nanoc is friendly with different CSS and HTML preprocessors, so you can easily use SASS, LESS, HAML, Markdown and more.
Pro Open-source and free
Code can be viewed on GitHub.
Pro Single Binary - Cross Platform
Pro No dependencies
All other SSGs expect you to have a full toolchain setup for their language. Hugo is written in Go and distributed as an executable for unix, linux, windows and mac. Just download and run.
Pro Clean workflow
Create your new site, run the Hugo server, edit. Lather, rinse, repeat. Hugo stays out of the way.
Pro Good documentation
Pro Draft mode
Allows you to see changes in real time.