Pros of Inputmask

• More extensive feature set, including support for various input types and formats
• Regular updates and active maintenance
• Dependency-free, can be used without jQuery

Cons of Inputmask

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex configuration options
• Larger file size, which may impact page load times

Code Comparison

Inputmask:

Inputmask("99/99/9999").mask(document.getElementById("date"));

jquery.maskedinput:

$("#date").mask("99/99/9999");

Both libraries offer similar basic functionality for masking input fields. However, Inputmask provides more advanced features and customization options, while jquery.maskedinput focuses on simplicity and ease of use.

Inputmask supports a wider range of input types and formats, making it more versatile for complex input masking requirements. It also doesn't depend on jQuery, which can be beneficial for projects not using this library.

On the other hand, jquery.maskedinput has a simpler API and may be easier to implement for basic masking needs. Its smaller file size could be advantageous for projects prioritizing performance.

Ultimately, the choice between these libraries depends on the specific requirements of your project, the desired level of customization, and whether jQuery dependency is a concern.

Pros of jQuery-Mask-Plugin

• More actively maintained with recent updates
• Supports a wider range of input types and formats
• Offers more customization options and flexibility

Cons of jQuery-Mask-Plugin

• Slightly larger file size
• May have a steeper learning curve for complex masks

Code Comparison

jquery.maskedinput:

$("#date").mask("99/99/9999");
$("#phone").mask("(999) 999-9999");
$("#ssn").mask("999-99-9999");

jQuery-Mask-Plugin:

$('#date').mask('00/00/0000');
$('#phone').mask('(000) 000-0000');
$('#ssn').mask('000-00-0000');
$('#custom').mask('AA-00-SSSS', {
  translation: { 'A': {pattern: /[A-Z]/}, 'S': {pattern: /[a-zA-Z]/} }
});

Both plugins offer similar basic functionality for common input masks. However, jQuery-Mask-Plugin provides more advanced features, such as custom translations and patterns, allowing for more complex and flexible mask definitions. This makes it suitable for a wider range of use cases, especially when dealing with non-standard input formats or international variations.

Pros of Cleave.js

• No jQuery dependency, making it more lightweight and versatile
• Supports more input types, including credit cards, numerals, and dates
• Offers real-time formatting as the user types

Cons of Cleave.js

• Less extensive documentation compared to jQuery.maskedinput
• Fewer customization options for complex masks
• Slightly steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

Cleave.js:

var cleave = new Cleave('.input-element', {
  numeral: true,
  numeralThousandsGroupStyle: 'thousand'
});

jQuery.maskedinput:

jQuery(function($){
   $("#date").mask("99/99/9999");
   $("#phone").mask("(999) 999-9999");
});

Both libraries aim to provide input masking functionality, but they differ in their approach and implementation. Cleave.js offers a more modern, flexible solution without jQuery dependency, while jQuery.maskedinput provides a simpler, jQuery-based approach with a focus on traditional input masking.

Cleave.js is better suited for projects that don't use jQuery or require more diverse input formatting options. jQuery.maskedinput might be preferable for jQuery-based projects or those needing simple, predefined mask patterns.

Ultimately, the choice between these libraries depends on project requirements, existing dependencies, and the specific input formatting needs of the application.

Pros of text-mask

• Framework-agnostic, supports React, Angular, Vue, and vanilla JavaScript
• More flexible and customizable input masking options
• Active development and maintenance

Cons of text-mask

• Larger bundle size due to its modular architecture
• Steeper learning curve for advanced customizations

Code Comparison

text-mask:

import createNumberMask from 'text-mask-addons/dist/createNumberMask'

const numberMask = createNumberMask({
  prefix: '$',
  allowDecimal: true,
  includeThousandsSeparator: true,
})

jquery.maskedinput:

jQuery(function($){
   $("#date").mask("99/99/9999");
   $("#phone").mask("(999) 999-9999");
   $("#tin").mask("99-9999999");
});

Key Differences

• text-mask offers more granular control over mask creation
• jquery.maskedinput relies on jQuery, while text-mask is framework-independent
• text-mask provides a more modern approach to input masking

Use Cases

• text-mask: Ideal for complex, customized input masks in modern web applications
• jquery.maskedinput: Better suited for simpler masking needs in jQuery-based projects

Community and Support

• text-mask has a larger and more active community
• jquery.maskedinput has been around longer but has less frequent updates

Performance

• text-mask may have slightly higher overhead due to its flexibility
• jquery.maskedinput is lightweight but limited to jQuery environments

Pros of generatedata

• More comprehensive data generation capabilities, supporting various data types and formats
• Offers a web-based interface for easy data generation without coding
• Actively maintained with regular updates and improvements

Cons of generatedata

• Larger and more complex project, potentially harder to integrate into existing workflows
• Requires more setup and configuration compared to the simpler jquery.maskedinput

Code Comparison

generatedata example (PHP):

$generator = new \GDGenerator();
$generator->addDataType('names', ['numRows' => 100]);
$generator->addDataType('email', ['numRows' => 100]);
$data = $generator->generate();

jquery.maskedinput example (JavaScript):

$("#date").mask("99/99/9999");
$("#phone").mask("(999) 999-9999");
$("#tin").mask("99-9999999");

Summary

generatedata is a more powerful and versatile tool for generating various types of data, while jquery.maskedinput focuses specifically on input masking for form fields. generatedata offers a wider range of features and a user-friendly interface, but may be overkill for simple input formatting tasks. jquery.maskedinput is lightweight and easy to implement for basic input masking needs, but lacks the extensive data generation capabilities of generatedata.