Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone 12222

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 = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Json clone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone

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's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. `Lodash cloneDeep`: This test case uses Lodash's `cloneDeep` function to create a deep copy of the `MyObject` object.
2. `Json clone`: This test case uses the `structuredClone` function (introduced in ECMAScript 2020) to create a deep copy of the `MyObject` object.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines an object `MyObject` with several properties, including nested objects and primitive values. The object is designed to be easily cloned or copied.

**Html Preparation Code**

The html preparation code includes a reference to Lodash's minified library (`lodash.min.js`) using a CDN link. This ensures that the Lodash library is loaded and available for use in the benchmark.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two options are being compared:

1. `Lodash cloneDeep`: This method uses Lodash's implementation of deep cloning, which creates a new object with recursively copied properties.
2. `Json clone`: This method uses the `structuredClone` function (introduced in ECMAScript 2020), which is designed to create a deep copy of an object while preserving its internal structure and references.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* `Lodash cloneDeep`:
	+ Pros: widely supported, mature implementation, can handle complex objects with cycles.
	+ Cons: requires Lodash library, may introduce additional overhead due to the library's presence in the benchmark.
* `Json clone`:
	+ Pros: newer, standardized method (ECMAScript 2020), designed for performance and efficiency, preserves internal structure and references.
	+ Cons: may not work as expected with all types of objects or circular references, still relatively new and less widely adopted.

**Library and Purpose**

In the benchmark, Lodash's `cloneDeep` function is used to create a deep copy of the `MyObject`. The purpose of this function is to recursively create a new object that mirrors the structure and properties of the original object, without modifying it.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax. It relies solely on standard ECMAScript functions and libraries (Lodash).

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to write this benchmark from scratch, some alternative approaches could be considered:

* Using a different deep cloning library (e.g., `json-stringify-safe` or `deepclone`) instead of Lodash's implementation.
* Implementing a custom deep cloning algorithm using standard JavaScript functions and data structures (e.g., recursive function with `Object.assign()`).
* Comparing the performance of different serialization formats, such as JSON or XML.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark code and might not produce identical results.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone 12222 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

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):