The descriptions of uglify-js and uglify-es are the same except that uglify-es tacks "for ES6+" on the end. Based on that one would think uglify-es is the best option for ES6 code. On the other hand, uglify-es is older - version 3.3.9 published 5 months ago, versus uglify-js at version 3.4.2 published 2 days ago. Anyone want to clear up my confusion?
Asked
Active
Viewed 6,361 times
12
-
With uglify-js you need to transpile your ES6 code (babel) with uglify-es should be stright forward. Im not sure the versions between uglify-js and uglify-es being symetric but as far as I know. I have an old app (jquery) and I use uglify-es to minfy and uglify the code instead of new apps that uses webpack (which will take care of the js and the css) – M. Gara Jun 29 '18 at 03:50
-
According to the talk [Building a Platform: Webpack and the Future](https://youtu.be/nzb-dgNaImI?t=7m56s), uglify-es comes with (better?) parallelism and caching, resulting in a significant speedup for Webpack 4. – CodeManX Aug 24 '18 at 09:14
1 Answers
28
uglify-js only supports ES5 code as input.
uglify-es also supports ES6, but is buggy and has been abandoned.
terser is a maintained replacement for it that can also handle ES6+.
Dan Abramov
- 264,556
- 84
- 409
- 511
-
where do you see that uglify-es has been abandoned? I'm asking because I use it for my projects. Just last week it got 1,3 million downloads, it really does not seem abandoned – João Pimentel Ferreira Sep 24 '20 at 09:09
-
by abandoned, Dan means it is no longer maintained. No developers work on the project, so it is out of date – Robbie Milejczak Jan 15 '21 at 14:30