Rapid and uncontrolled population growth along with economic and industrial development, especially in developing countries during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, have increased the rate of land-use/land-cover (LULC) change many times. Since quantitative assessment of changes in LULC is one of the most efficient means to understand and manage the land transformation, there is a need to examine the accuracy of different algorithms for LULC mapping in order to identify the best classifier for further applications of earth observations. In this article, six machine-learning algorithms, namely random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), artificial neural network (ANN), fuzzy adaptive resonance theory-supervised predictive mapping (Fuzzy ARTMAP), spectral angle mapper (SAM) and Mahalanobis distance (MD) were examined. Accuracy assessment was performed by using Kappa coefficient, receiver operational curve (RoC), index-based validation and root mean square error (RMSE). Results of Kappa coefficient show that all the classifiers have a similar accuracy level with minor variation, but the RF algorithm has the highest accuracy of 0.89 and the MD algorithm (parametric classifier) has the least accuracy of 0.82. In addition, the index-based LULC and visual cross-validation show that the RF algorithm (correlations between RF and normalised differentiation water index, normalised differentiation vegetation index and normalised differentiation built-up index are 0.96, 0.99 and 1, respectively, at 0.05 level of significance) has the highest accuracy level in comparison to the other classifiers adopted. Findings from the literature also proved that ANN and RF algorithms are the best LULC classifiers, although a non-parametric classifier like SAM (Kappa coefficient 0.84; area under curve (AUC) 0.85) has a better and consistent accuracy level than the other machine-learning algorithms. Finally, this review concludes that the RF algorithm is the best machine-learning LULC classifier, among the six examined algorithms although it is necessary to further test the RF algorithm in different morphoclimatic conditions in the future.