Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep VS spread operator vs angular.copy

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/angular.js/1.8.3/angular.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Spread operator
myCopy = {...MyObject};
Angular copy
myCopy = angular.copy(MyObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Spread operator
Angular copy

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 dive into the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to create a shallow copy of an object: Lodash's `cloneDeep` function, the spread operator (`...`), and Angular's `copy` method. The test creates an object with nested properties and measures the execution time of each approach.

**Options Compared**

The three options being compared are:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: A deep cloning function from the popular utility library Lodash.
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: A syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2018, allowing objects to be spread into new objects.
3. **Angular copy**: A method from the Angular framework for creating a shallow copy of an object.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	* Pros: Robustness, flexibility (can handle complex objects), and easy-to-use API.
	* Cons: Additional library dependency, slower execution time compared to native spread operator or Angular's `copy` method.
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**
	* Pros: Native JavaScript syntax, fast execution time, and zero additional dependencies.
	* Cons: Limited support for complex objects (only shallow copies), and may not work as expected in certain scenarios.
3. **Angular copy**:
	* Pros: Fast execution time, efficient implementation, and designed specifically for Angular applications.
	* Cons: Limited usage outside of Angular framework, may require additional setup or dependencies.

**Library and Purpose**

1. **Lodash**: A popular JavaScript utility library providing various functions for tasks like array manipulation, function currying, and object manipulation.
2. **Angular**: A JavaScript framework for building web applications, which includes the `copy` method in its `angular.copy` function.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses the spread operator (`...`) introduced in ECMAScript 2018, allowing objects to be spread into new objects. This syntax is widely supported in modern browsers and JavaScript engines.

**Other Alternatives**

For shallow copying of objects, other alternatives include:

1. **Object.assign()**: A native JavaScript method for merging objects.
2. **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))**: A simple but inefficient approach that converts the object to a JSON string and then parses it back into an object.

In summary, the benchmark provides a comprehensive comparison of three approaches to create shallow copies of objects: Lodash's `cloneDeep`, the spread operator (`...`), and Angular's `copy`. Each option has its pros and cons, and understanding these trade-offs can help developers choose the most suitable approach for their specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep VS spread operator vs angular.copy (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Spread operator vs Angular copy

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Spread operator

Angular copy

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):