Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone test 2

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 myCopy = null;

var stringified = JSON.stringify(MyObject)

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Json clone
myCopy = JSON.parse(stringified);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone

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.

I'll break down the explanation for you.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of two approaches: Lodash's `cloneDeep` function and the built-in `JSON.parse()` method. The test creates a deep copy of an object using both methods and measures their execution times.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared in this benchmark:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: This approach uses the `cloneDeep` function from the Lodash library to create a deep copy of the input object.
2. **JSON Clone**: This approach directly parses a stringified version of the object using the `JSON.parse()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	+ Pros: Provides a more robust and flexible way to create deep copies, as it handles complex data structures like arrays and objects with circular references.
	+ Cons: Requires an additional dependency (the Lodash library), which may increase the benchmark's overall size and complexity.
* **JSON Clone**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight and simple, as it only relies on the built-in `JSON.parse()` method.
	+ Cons: May not handle complex data structures or circular references well, potentially leading to errors or incorrect results.

**Library and Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular utility function suite for JavaScript. In this benchmark, the `cloneDeep` function is used to create deep copies of objects, which can be useful in various scenarios where deep object copying is required.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets that would require specific knowledge or handling.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative approaches for creating deep copies in JavaScript, consider:

* Using the `Object.assign()` method with an array of targets to create a deep copy.
* Utilizing libraries like Immer or immer.js, which provide more robust and efficient deep copying mechanisms.
* Implementing your own custom deep copying function using recursion and/or iteration.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on the specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone test 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

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):