Benchmark: cloneDeep vs JSON stringify + parse (structured arr)

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 = [
	{
		"id": "0001",
		"type": "donut",
		"name": "Cake",
		"ppu": 0.55,
		"batters":
			{
				"batter":
					[
						{ "id": "1001", "type": "Regular" },
						{ "id": "1002", "type": "Chocolate" },
						{ "id": "1003", "type": "Blueberry" },
						{ "id": "1004", "type": "Devil's Food" }
					]
			},
		"topping":
			[
				{ "id": "5001", "type": "None" },
				{ "id": "5002", "type": "Glazed" },
				{ "id": "5005", "type": "Sugar" },
				{ "id": "5007", "type": "Powdered Sugar" },
				{ "id": "5006", "type": "Chocolate with Sprinkles" },
				{ "id": "5003", "type": "Chocolate" },
				{ "id": "5004", "type": "Maple" }
			]
	},
	{
		"id": "0002",
		"type": "donut",
		"name": "Raised",
		"ppu": 0.55,
		"batters":
			{
				"batter":
					[
						{ "id": "1001", "type": "Regular" }
					]
			},
		"topping":
			[
				{ "id": "5001", "type": "None" },
				{ "id": "5002", "type": "Glazed" },
				{ "id": "5005", "type": "Sugar" },
				{ "id": "5003", "type": "Chocolate" },
				{ "id": "5004", "type": "Maple" }
			]
	},
	{
		"id": "0003",
		"type": "donut",
		"name": "Old Fashioned",
		"ppu": 0.55,
		"batters":
			{
				"batter":
					[
						{ "id": "1001", "type": "Regular" },
						{ "id": "1002", "type": "Chocolate" }
					]
			},
		"topping":
			[
				{ "id": "5001", "type": "None" },
				{ "id": "5002", "type": "Glazed" },
				{ "id": "5003", "type": "Chocolate" },
				{ "id": "5004", "type": "Maple" }
			]
	}
]

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.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two methods for deep cloning an object:

1. `_.cloneDeep(obj)` from Lodash
2. JSON stringification followed by parsing (`JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`)

**What's Being Tested?**

Both tests aim to create a deep copy of the input object `obj`, which contains nested arrays and objects.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two methods:

1. **Deep Cloning with Lodash**: Uses the `_.cloneDeep()` function from Lodash, which is designed for deep cloning.
2. **JSON Stringification and Parsing**: Converts the object to a JSON string using `JSON.stringify(obj)` and then parses it back into an object using `JSON.parse()`. This approach relies on the default behavior of `JSON.stringify()` to create a shallow copy of the object.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Deep Cloning with Lodash**:
	* Pros:
		+ Designed for deep cloning, ensuring accuracy.
		+ Handles complex data structures (arrays, objects).
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an additional library (Lodash), which may introduce overhead.
2. **JSON Stringification and Parsing**:
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight, no extra dependencies required.
		+ Can be faster since it only involves string manipulation.
	* Cons:
		+ May not work correctly for complex data structures or large objects.
		+ Creates a shallow copy of the object, which may not be suitable in all cases.

**Other Considerations**

When using `JSON.stringify()` followed by `JSON.parse()`, keep in mind that:

* This approach only creates a shallow copy of the object, as `JSON.stringify()` only traverses the top-level properties.
* This method can fail if the input object contains circular references or other complex structures.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

This benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax. However, it relies on the behavior of `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()`, which are built-in functions in JavaScript.

Now, regarding alternatives to these methods:

If you need a deep clone that's more efficient than Lodash's `_.cloneDeep()` or if you prefer not to use an external library, you can consider using a custom implementation that recursively clones the object. Alternatively, you could explore other libraries or modules that provide alternative cloning functions.

For example, you might look into using `immer` or ` deepcopy` from `deepcopy` module

Related benchmarks:

cloneDeep vs JSON stringify + parse (structured arr) (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):