Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone with Array

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 = [[1,2,3],[1,2,3],[1,2,3]];

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

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

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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, the options being compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares two approaches to cloning an array: `lodash.cloneDeep` (a library function) and `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())`.

**Script Preparation Code**

```javascript
var MyObject = [[1,2,3],[1,2,3],[1,2,3]];
var myCopy = null;
```

This code defines a nested array `MyObject` with three identical inner arrays.

**Html Preparation Code**

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

This script tag includes the Lodash library, which provides the `cloneDeep` function being used in the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**

```javascript
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
```

The `_.cloneDeep` function is used to deep-clone the `MyObject` array, creating a new, independent copy of it.

2. **JSON Clone**

```javascript
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));
```

This approach uses `JSON.parse()` and `JSON.stringify()` to create a copy of the original array. The `JSON.parse()` function is used to parse the string representation of the object, effectively creating a new object with the same values.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a robust way to deep-clone objects, including nested arrays.
		+ Can handle complex data structures, such as cycles or circular references.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an external library (Lodash).
		+ May have additional overhead due to the size of the library.
2. **JSON Clone**
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and doesn't require any external libraries.
		+ Simple and easy to understand, making it a good choice for educational purposes or simple use cases.
	* Cons:
		+ Can fail if the original object contains circular references or non-serializable data.
		+ May not provide the same level of performance as `cloneDeep` due to the additional parsing step.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a wide range of utility functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. The `cloneDeep` function is part of this library and is designed to deep-clone objects recursively, handling complex data structures like nested arrays.

**Special JS Feature: None**

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

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to clone an array without using a library, you can use the `slice()` method, which creates a shallow copy of the original array:

```javascript
myCopy = MyObject.slice();
```

Alternatively, if you're working with older browsers that don't support modern JavaScript features, you might consider using a library like Underscore.js or Mojs.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone with Array (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):