Benchmark: JSON.stringify vs slice

Script Preparation code:

var vertices = [
      [1, 0, 0, 0],
      [0, 1, 0, 0],
      [0, 0, 1, 0],
      [0, 0, 0, 1],
    ]

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

JSON.stringify
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(vertices));
structuredClone
myCopy = vertices.slice();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.stringify
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 JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to create a copy of an array: `JSON.stringify` and `slice()` (also known as `structuredClone` in modern JavaScript).

**Options Compared**

1. **JSON.stringify**: This method creates a deep copy of the input object or array by serializing it into a JSON string and then parsing it back into an object or array.
2. **slice() (structuredClone)**: This method creates a shallow copy of the input array by returning a new array object that references the original elements.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **JSON.stringify**
	* Pros:
		+ Works for non-array inputs, such as objects
		+ Can be used to serialize data to a string format
	* Cons:
		+ Can lead to performance issues due to the overhead of serializing and parsing the data
		+ May not work correctly with all types of data, especially complex ones like Date objects or arrays with cyclic references
2. **slice() (structuredClone)**
	* Pros:
		+ Works for arrays only
		+ Creates a shallow copy, which can be more efficient than deep copying for large datasets
	* Cons:
		+ Does not work for non-array inputs
		+ May have performance issues if the array is very large or has many cyclic references

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, `structuredClone` is used as a way to compare the performance of `slice()` with `JSON.stringify`. However, it's worth noting that `structuredClone` is a relatively new feature in JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2022) and may not be supported in older browsers or environments.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code is standard JavaScript and does not rely on any experimental or proprietary features.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. **Array.prototype.slice()**: This method creates a shallow copy of the array by returning a new array object that references the original elements.
2. **Array.prototype.concat() and Array.prototype.push()**: This approach involves concatenating an empty array to the original array, which can create a new array object with references to the original elements.
3. **Array.from() and Array.prototype.map()**: This approach involves converting the original array to an array using `Array.from()` and then creating a new array by mapping over the original array.

These alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the options tested in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

JSON.stringify vs slice (version: 0)

JSON.stringify vs slice

Comparing performance of: JSON.stringify vs structuredClone

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.stringify

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):