Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone 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 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);
Native structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);
JSON.stringify / parse
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Native structuredClone
JSON.stringify / parse

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 148 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash cloneDeep	2023540.2 Ops/sec
Native structuredClone	696887.6 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify / parse	2177662.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three methods for creating a deep copy of an object: `_.cloneDeep` from Lodash, `structuredClone`, and `JSON.stringify/parse`.

**Options Compared**

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: Uses the `_` object (a utility library) to create a deep copy of the input object.
2. **Native structuredClone**: Uses the new `structuredClone()` method in JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2020), which creates a deep copy of an object.
3. **JSON.stringify/parse**: Uses `JSON.stringify()` to convert the object to a JSON string and then parses it back into an object using `JSON.parse()`, which can also create a deep copy.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	+ Pros: Well-tested, widely used, and easy to use.
	+ Cons: Adds external dependency (Lodash), may have performance overhead due to its implementation.
* **Native structuredClone**:
	+ Pros: New method in JavaScript, designed for deep copying, fast and efficient.
	+ Cons: Only available in modern browsers and Node.js versions that support ECMAScript 2020.
* **JSON.stringify/parse**:
	+ Pros: Fast and lightweight, no external dependencies required.
	+ Cons: May have issues with circular references or other edge cases, can be slower than the native `structuredClone` method.

**Library and Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, including functional programming, data manipulation, and more. In this benchmark, `_` object is used to access the `cloneDeep` function, which creates a deep copy of an object.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The `structuredClone()` method is a new addition to JavaScript (ECMAScript 2020) that creates a deep copy of an object without cloning its prototype chain. This method is designed for creating exact copies of objects, including their inner structures and properties.

**Other Alternatives**

For creating a deep copy of an object in the absence of `structuredClone()`, other approaches include:

* Using the `_` object's `cloneDeep()` method from Lodash or similar libraries.
* Implementing a custom deep copying function using recursive functions or other techniques.
* Using libraries like Immutable.js, which provides a way to create immutable copies of objects.

In summary, this benchmark compares the performance of three methods for creating a deep copy of an object: `_.cloneDeep` from Lodash, `structuredClone`, and `JSON.stringify/parse`. The native `structuredClone()` method is recommended due to its speed and efficiency, but may not be suitable for older browsers or Node.js versions.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs JSON.stringify/parse (version: 0)

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/structuredClone

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone vs JSON.stringify / parse

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Native structuredClone

JSON.stringify / parse

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):