Benchmark: RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs Clone

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/rfdc@1.1.4/index.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.20/lodash.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/clone@2.1.2/clone.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var sampleObject = [{
        "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"
            }
        ]
    }
];

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(sampleObject);
Json clone
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(sampleObject));
RFDC copy
var clone = rfdc(); myCopy = clone(sampleObject);
Clone
myCopy = clone(sampleObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone
RFDC copy
Clone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

RFDC copy

256K/s

Json clone

92K/s

Lodash cloneDeep

53K/s

Clone

53K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ RFDC copy	255,536 Ops/sec
Json clone	91,599 Ops/sec
Lodash cloneDeep	53,076 Ops/sec
Clone	52,733 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark compares the performance of four different cloning methods:

1. `RFDC` (Randomized Deep Clone): A custom implementation for cloning complex objects.
2. `Lodash cloneDeep`: The `cloneDeep` function from the popular Lodash library, which is designed to create deep copies of objects.
3. `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())`: A built-in JavaScript method for cloning objects by serializing and deserializing them as JSON strings.
4. A custom implementation labeled "Clone".

**Options Compared**

The four cloning methods are being compared in terms of their performance, specifically:

* Execution frequency per second (i.e., how many times each method can be executed within a second)
* Raw UA string (a unique identifier for the browser and device)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **RFDC**: Pros: Custom implementation, potentially optimized for specific use cases; Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to its custom nature.
2. **Lodash cloneDeep**: Pros: Well-tested and widely used library; Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash) and may have some limitations in terms of performance or compatibility.
3. **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())**: Pros: Built-in method, easy to implement; Cons: May not work well with complex objects or circular references, as it only serializes the object's values, not its references.
4. **Clone** (custom implementation): Pros: Custom optimization for specific use cases; Cons: Lack of testing and validation, potentially introducing errors or performance issues.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case executes a different cloning method on the `sampleObject` array:

1. `Lodash cloneDeep`: Uses `_.cloneDeep` to create a deep copy of the object.
2. `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())`: Serializes the object as JSON, then deserializes it back into an object.
3. `RFDC copy`: Calls the `rfdc()` function with `sampleObject` as an argument, which is expected to return a deep clone of the object.
4. `Clone`: Implements a custom cloning method using the same logic as `RFDC`.

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show the execution frequency per second for each test case:

1. `RFDC copy`: 255535.515625 executions/second
2. `Json clone`: 91598.765625 executions/second
3. `Lodash cloneDeep`: 53075.73046875 executions/second
4. `Clone`: 52732.72265625 executions/second

The results suggest that the custom `RFDC` implementation performs better than Lodash's `cloneDeep`, while `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())` is significantly slower due to its limitations. The custom "Clone" implementation falls in between, but its performance is not as good as `RFDC`.

RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs Clone (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs Clone`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

RFDC copy

Clone

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs Clone (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs Clone

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

RFDC copy

Clone

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs Clone`