Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep object var vs JSON Clone string var

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {
  description: 'Creates a deep copy of source, which should be an object or an array.',
  myNumber: 123456789,
  myBoolean: true,
  jayson: {
    stringify: 'JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string....',
    parse: 'JSON.parse() method parses a JSON string...'
  }
};

var MyString = JSON.stringify(MyObject)

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep from object
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Json clone from string
myCopy = JSON.parse(MyString);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep from object
Json clone from string

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what is being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Overall Test Case**

The test case compares two approaches to cloning objects and strings in JavaScript:

1. Cloning an object using `lodash.cloneDeep`
2. Cloning a string using `JSON.parse`

**Lodash Clone Deep**

The first test case uses Lodash's `cloneDeep` function to create a deep copy of the `MyObject` object. This function creates a new, independent copy of the original object, including all its properties and nested objects.

Pros:

* Creates an accurate deep copy of the object
* Can handle complex data structures with many levels of nesting

Cons:

* Requires the Lodash library to be included in the test environment
* May have overhead due to the complexity of the cloning process

**JSON Clone**

The second test case uses `JSON.parse` to create a new string representation of the original object, which is then parsed back into an object using `JSON.parse`. This approach creates a shallow copy of the object.

Pros:

* Does not require any additional libraries
* Can be faster and more lightweight than cloning with Lodash

Cons:

* Only creates a shallow copy of the object (i.e., it does not recursively clone nested objects)
* May lose data from nested objects that are not JSON-serializable

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object creation, and string manipulation. In this case, `cloneDeep` is used to create a deep copy of the original object.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for cloning objects and strings in JavaScript include:

* Using the built-in `Object.assign()` method with the spread operator (`{...obj}`) to create a shallow copy of an object
* Using the `JSON.stringify()` method followed by parsing the resulting string back into an object using `JSON.parse()`
* Using a custom implementation of deep cloning, such as by recursively iterating over the object's properties and creating new objects for each one.

It's worth noting that while these alternatives may be viable options, they may not offer the same level of accuracy or performance as Lodash's `cloneDeep` function.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep object var vs JSON Clone string var (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep from object vs Json clone from string

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep from object

Json clone from string

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):