slugify vs slug vs url-slug vs slugg | Slug Generation Libraries Comparison

Package	Downloads	Stars	Size	Issues	Publish	License

slugify	5,481,599	1,662	20.9 kB	43	2 years ago	MIT
slug	342,945	378	33 kB	7	2 months ago	MIT
url-slug	248,892	89	34 kB	1	2 years ago	MIT
slugg	32,119	366	-	2	8 years ago	BSD

Customization

slugify:
slugify is the most customizable of the four, allowing developers to set delimiters, specify allowed characters, and configure language-specific rules. This makes it ideal for projects that require fine-tuned control over the slugging process.
slug:
slug offers basic customization options, such as changing the delimiter and removing specific characters, but it is relatively limited in terms of configurability.
url-slug:
url-slug allows for simple customization of delimiters and character replacement, but it is designed to be straightforward and does not offer extensive configuration options.
slugg:
slugg provides some customization for handling duplicates but is not highly configurable beyond that. It focuses more on automatically managing duplicate slugs than on offering extensive customization features.

Duplicate Handling

slugify:
slugify does not have built-in duplicate handling. It generates slugs based on the input string, and any duplicate management must be handled separately by the developer.
slug:
slug does not handle duplicate slugs automatically. Developers need to implement their own logic to manage duplicates if required.
url-slug:
url-slug does not provide any duplicate handling features. It generates slugs based on the input string, and managing duplicates is the responsibility of the developer.
slugg:
slugg automatically handles duplicate slugs by appending a number to the end of the slug (e.g., my-slug, my-slug-1, my-slug-2). This feature is built-in and requires no additional implementation.

Performance

slugify:
slugify is efficient, but its performance may vary depending on the complexity of the customization and the number of characters being processed. It is generally fast for most use cases but may be slower than simpler libraries for highly customized slug generation.
slug:
slug is lightweight and performs well for generating slugs quickly. It has minimal overhead, making it suitable for applications where performance is a concern.
url-slug:
url-slug is designed to be fast and efficient, with a focus on minimalism. It performs well for generating slugs quickly without significant resource usage.
slugg:
slugg is also lightweight, but the duplicate handling feature may introduce a slight performance overhead when generating slugs, especially if many duplicates are present.

Ease of Use: Code Examples

slugify:

Customizable slugs with slugify

const slugify = require('slugify');
const mySlug = slugify('Hello World!', { lower: true, strict: true });
console.log(mySlug); // Output: hello-world

slug:

Simple slug generation with slug

const slug = require('slug');
const mySlug = slug('Hello World!');
console.log(mySlug); // Output: hello-world

url-slug:

Simple and fast slugs with url-slug

const urlSlug = require('url-slug');
const mySlug = urlSlug('Hello World!');
console.log(mySlug); // Output: hello-world

slugg:

Automatic duplicate handling with slugg

const slugg = require('slugg');
const slug1 = slugg('My Slug');
const slug2 = slugg('My Slug');
const slug3 = slugg('My Slug');
console.log(slug1, slug2, slug3);
// Output: my-slug my-slug-1 my-slug-2

Customization

Duplicate Handling

Performance

Ease of Use: Code Examples

slugify

Options

Remove

Locales

Extend

Contribute