Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep VS spread operator Toon

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: 'a',
  myNumber: 123456789,
  myBoolean: true,
};

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.clone(MyObject);
Spread operator
myCopy = {...MyObject};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Spread operator

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.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance of two methods for cloning an object:

1. Using the `_.clone()` function from Lodash, a popular utility library for JavaScript.
2. Using the spread operator (`...`) to create a copy of the original object.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared in this benchmark:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: This method uses the `_` symbol (a shorthand for "underscore") and the `clone()` function from Lodash to create a deep copy of the original object.
2. **Spread operator**: This method uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a shallow copy of the original object.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons of each approach:

**Lodash cloneDeep:**

Pros:

* Provides a consistent, reliable way to create deep copies of objects.
* Handles nested objects and arrays correctly.
* Part of the Lodash library, which is widely used and well-maintained.

Cons:

* Adds an external dependency (Lodash) to the benchmark.
* May have performance overhead due to the additional function call.

**Spread operator:**

Pros:

* Lightweight and easy to implement.
* Creates a shallow copy of the object, which may be sufficient for many use cases.
* Native to JavaScript, so no external dependencies are added.

Cons:

* Only creates a shallow copy of the object, which means that nested objects or arrays may not be cloned correctly.
* May not work as expected with certain data structures (e.g., arrays with many elements).

**Other Considerations**

When using the spread operator, it's essential to note that it only works for creating copies of plain objects. For more complex data structures, other methods may be required.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string processing, and object cloning. The `_.clone()` function used in this benchmark creates a deep copy of the original object, which can be useful when working with complex data structures.

**Special JS Feature: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. Both options rely on standard JavaScript language features.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you need to create a deep copy of an object without using Lodash, you could consider the following approaches:

1. Using the `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` method, which creates a shallow copy of the object.
2. Implementing a custom cloning function that iterates over the object's properties and recursively clones nested objects.
3. Using a library like `immer` or `deepcopy`, which provides functions for creating deep copies of objects.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have performance overhead, added dependencies, or other trade-offs compared to using Lodash or the spread operator.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep VS spread operator Toon (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Spread operator

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Spread operator

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):