Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone fork

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;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));
Native structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Native structuredClone

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 is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to creating a deep copy of an object: using Lodash's `cloneDeep` function and the native `structuredClone` method introduced in ECMAScript 2020. The benchmark creates a test object with nested properties, including a JSON string representation, and then attempts to create a deep copy of it using both methods.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: Lodash's `cloneDeep` function is used to create a deep copy of the test object. This method recursively traverses the object graph, creating new objects for each nested property.
2. **Native structuredClone**: The native `structuredClone` method is used to create a deep copy of the test object. This method also recursively traverses the object graph and creates new objects for each nested property.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	+ Pros: Widely supported, well-tested, and easy to use.
	+ Cons: Adds extra overhead due to Lodash's additional JavaScript code.
* **Native structuredClone**:
	+ Pros: Optimized for performance, as it's a built-in method in modern browsers.
	+ Cons: Requires support for ECMAScript 2020, which might not be available in older browsers.

**Library and Purpose**

The `structuredClone` method is a part of the ECMAScript standard and was introduced in ECMAScript 2020. It provides a fast and efficient way to create deep copies of objects, arrays, and other data structures. The purpose of this method is to provide a high-performance alternative to traditional cloning methods.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The benchmark uses ECMAScript 2020's `structuredClone` method, which introduces a new syntax for creating deep copies: `structuredClone(source)`. This feature requires support for ECMAScript 2020 in the browser.

**Other Alternatives**

If the browser does not support `structuredClone`, other alternatives can be used to create deep copies:

1. **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())**: A widely supported method that creates a deep copy by serializing the object to JSON and then parsing it back into an object.
2. **for...in loop**: A manual approach using a for-in loop to iterate over the object's properties and create new objects.

In summary, the benchmark compares two approaches to creating deep copies of objects: Lodash's `cloneDeep` function and the native `structuredClone` method introduced in ECMAScript 2020. The choice between these options depends on performance considerations, browser support, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone fork (version: 0)

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/structuredClone

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Native structuredClone

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):