Benchmark: underscore clone VS spread operator

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.13.6/underscore-min.js" integrity="sha512-2V49R8ndaagCOnwmj8QnbT1Gz/rie17UouD9Re5WxbzRVUGoftCu5IuqqtAM9+UC3fwfHCSJR1hkzNQh/2wdtg==" crossorigin="anonymous" referrerpolicy="no-referrer"></script>

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

underscore clone shallow
myCopy = _.clone(MyObject);
Spread operator
myCopy = {...MyObject};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
underscore clone shallow
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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between using the `_.clone()` method from the popular JavaScript library Underscore.js and the spread operator (`...`) to create a copy of an object.

**Options Compared**

Two approaches are compared:

1. **Underscore.js Clone**: Uses the `_.clone()` method, which creates a deep clone of the original object by recursively copying its properties.
2. **Spread Operator (ES6)**: Creates a shallow copy of the original object by creating a new object with the same properties as the original.

**Pros and Cons**

### Underscore.js Clone

Pros:

* Can handle complex objects with nested structures
* Can preserve the original object's prototype chain
* May be more convenient for certain use cases where deep cloning is necessary

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the recursive nature of the cloning process
* May introduce additional overhead due to the creation of an intermediate clone object

### Spread Operator (ES6)

Pros:

* Generally faster and more lightweight than the `_.clone()` method
* Creates a new object with only the top-level properties, making it suitable for shallow copying
* Part of the ECMAScript standard, ensuring consistency across browsers

Cons:

* May not preserve the original object's prototype chain or nested structures
* Limited to shallow copying; cannot handle deeply nested objects

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark focuses on the performance difference between these two approaches, but it's worth noting that other factors like code readability and maintainability may also be important.
* When working with complex objects, the choice of cloning method may depend on the specific requirements and constraints of the project.

**Library: Underscore.js**

Underscore.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functional programming helpers. The `_.clone()` method is one of its most useful features, allowing developers to create copies of objects with ease. In this benchmark, Underscore.js is used to provide a convenient way to create deep clones.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark does not require any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond ES6 support for the spread operator. However, it's worth noting that some older browsers may not support the spread operator natively; in such cases, a polyfill or alternative implementation may be necessary.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Underscore.js or the spread operator, consider the following options:

* **Lodash**: Another popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functional programming helpers. Lodash can be used as an alternative to Underscore.js.
* **Object.assign()**: A built-in method in modern JavaScript that allows creating shallow copies of objects.
* **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(object))**: A simple way to create a deep copy of an object, but it's not as efficient as the spread operator or `_.clone()`.

These alternatives offer different trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability, so choose the one that best suits your project's needs.

Related benchmarks:

underscore clone VS spread operator (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: underscore clone shallow vs Spread operator

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

underscore clone shallow

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):