Benchmark: cloneDeep vs JSON stringify + parse

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {
	n: 1,
	s: 's',
  	o: {
		o: { o: { o: { o: { o: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] } } } }
    },
  	a: [1, 2, { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: { a: { a: { a: { a: { a: 1 } } } } } } }]
}

Tests:

cloneDeep
_.cloneDeep(obj);
JSON
JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
cloneDeep
JSON

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 what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark is comparing two approaches to create a deep copy of an object:

1. `_.cloneDeep(obj)` (using Lodash library)
2. `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`

**Options Compared:**

* **Lodash.cloneDeep**: A function from the popular JavaScript utility library, Lodash, designed specifically for creating deep copies of objects.
* **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))**: A built-in JavaScript method that attempts to serialize and deserialize the input object, creating a shallow copy of it.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `_.cloneDeep`:
	+ Pros:
		- Created by a dedicated library (Lodash) specifically designed for deep copying.
		- More robust and efficient for handling complex objects with nested structures.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires an additional dependency (Lodash).
		- May not be as fast or lightweight as other options.
* `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`:
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in, no additional dependencies required.
		- Simple and easy to use.
	+ Cons:
		- Only creates a shallow copy of the object (i.e., doesn't handle circular references).
		- Can be slower than `_.cloneDeep` for large or complex objects.

**Library:**
The Lodash library is used in this benchmark. It provides a set of functional programming helpers, including `cloneDeep`, to make working with JavaScript data structures easier and more efficient.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**
There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark that require specific knowledge of JavaScript beyond basic understanding.

**Other Alternatives:**

* For creating deep copies without Lodash, you can use the native `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` approach (though it may not be as efficient for complex objects).
* Alternatively, you could use a custom implementation of deep copying using recursion or iteration.
* For more robust and efficient deep copying, consider using libraries like Immer, Immutable.js, or Ramda.

In summary, the benchmark is testing two approaches to creating deep copies of objects: Lodash's `_.cloneDeep` versus the built-in `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`. The choice between these options depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

cloneDeep vs JSON stringify + parse (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: cloneDeep vs JSON

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

cloneDeep

JSON

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):