PugSQL vs Slick: What are the differences?

# Introduction
This Markdown code provides the key differences between PugSQL and Slick, two popular SQL query libraries.

1. **Syntax**: PugSQL uses SQL-based syntax with minimal abstraction, making it easier for users familiar with SQL to write and understand queries. On the other hand, Slick uses a Scala-based DSL (Domain-Specific Language) for query construction, providing type-safety and compile-time query checks.
   
2. **Performance**: Slick's compiled queries offer better performance compared to PugSQL's runtime query building, as Slick optimizes the generated SQL queries and reduces overhead during execution.
   
3. **Database Support**: PugSQL supports a wider range of databases as it relies on standard SQL syntax that is supported by most databases. In contrast, Slick has more tight integration with Scala and may not support as many databases out-of-the-box.
   
4. **Flexibility**: PugSQL is more flexible when working with complex SQL queries and dynamic SQL generation, allowing users to write raw SQL queries easily. Slick, on the other hand, provides a more structured approach to query building, which may limit flexibility in certain scenarios.
   
5. **Learning Curve**: PugSQL may have a lower learning curve for SQL developers due to its similarity to traditional SQL syntax. In contrast, Slick's Scala-based DSL may have a steeper learning curve, especially for those new to functional programming or Scala.
   
6. **Extensibility**: Slick offers more extensibility through its support for custom query types and extensions, allowing users to create advanced query constructs. PugSQL, while versatile, may have limitations in terms of extending its functionality beyond standard SQL operations.

# Summary
In summary, PugSQL focuses on simplicity and flexibility with SQL-based syntax, while Slick offers performance optimization, type-safety, and extensibility through a Scala-based DSL, catering to different needs and preferences in SQL query libraries.