Benchmark: klona vs RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/rfdc@1.3.0/index.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/klona@2.0.4/json/index.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var sampleObject = [{
        "id": "0001",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Cake",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                    "id": "1001",
                    "type": "Regular"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1002",
                    "type": "Chocolate"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1003",
                    "type": "Blueberry"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1004",
                    "type": "Devil's Food"
                }
            ]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5005",
                "type": "Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5007",
                "type": "Powdered Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5006",
                "type": "Chocolate with Sprinkles"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    },
    {
        "id": "0002",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Raised",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                "id": "1001",
                "type": "Regular"
            }]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5005",
                "type": "Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    },
    {
        "id": "0003",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Old Fashioned",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                    "id": "1001",
                    "type": "Regular"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1002",
                    "type": "Chocolate"
                }
            ]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    }
];

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(sampleObject);
Json clone
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(sampleObject));
RFDC copy
var clone = rfdc(); myCopy = clone(sampleObject);
klona copy
myCopy = klona(sampleObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone
RFDC copy
klona copy

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 147 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash cloneDeep	71006.6 Ops/sec
Json clone	226446.3 Ops/sec
RFDC copy	348549.5 Ops/sec
klona copy	856155.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

The benchmark is comparing four different approaches to create a deep copy of an object in JavaScript:

1. **Lodash `cloneDeep`**: This function creates a deep copy of an object by recursively traversing the object's properties and creating new objects for each nested property.
2. **JSON cloning**: This approach uses the `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` method to create a deep copy of an object. However, this method can fail if the object contains functions or other non-enumerable properties.
3. **RFDC (Recursive Functionally Derived Clone) copy**: This function creates a deep copy of an object by recursively traversing the object's properties and creating new objects for each nested property, similar to Lodash `cloneDeep`. However, RFDC has some performance optimizations that make it faster than Lodash in certain cases.
4. **Klona copy**: Klona is a lightweight library specifically designed for cloning JavaScript objects. It uses a combination of recursion and caching to create fast and efficient deep copies.

Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Lodash `cloneDeep`**:
	+ Pros: Robustness, ease of use, and well-maintained.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than RFDC due to additional overhead from Lodash's internal mechanisms.
* **JSON cloning**:
	+ Pros: Simple and easy to implement.
	+ Cons: Can fail if the object contains functions or other non-enumerable properties, and can be slow for large objects.
* **RFDC copy**:
	+ Pros: Fast performance, optimized for certain use cases.
	+ Cons: Less robust than Lodash `cloneDeep`, and its internal mechanics might not be as well-understood.
* **Klona copy**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, fast, and optimized for cloning JavaScript objects.
	+ Cons: Might require additional setup or configuration to work correctly in certain environments.

In the latest benchmark results, we can see that:

* Klona copy outperforms RFDC copy by a significant margin.
* Lodash `cloneDeep` is slower than RFDC copy but still performs well compared to JSON cloning.
* JSON cloning fails to create a deep copy due to its limitations.

Overall, the choice of approach depends on the specific use case and performance requirements. If you need a robust and easy-to-use solution, Lodash `cloneDeep` might be a good choice. However, if you're looking for a lightweight and optimized solution, Klona copy or RFDC copy could be a better fit.

Related benchmarks:

klona vs RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs klona copy

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

RFDC copy

klona copy

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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