Benchmark: test thji - MeasureThat.net

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...'
  }
};

function memBreak(obj){
  //when an object is returned it breaks all memory ties
  return obj;
}

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

stringify
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));
memBreak
myCopy = memBreak(MyObject)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
stringify
memBreak

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.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance of two different approaches for creating a deep copy of an object in JavaScript:

1. **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))**: This method uses the `JSON.stringify()` function to serialize the object, and then immediately parses the resulting string back into a JSON object using `JSON.parse()`. The resulting object is expected to be a deep copy of the original object.
2. **memBreak(obj)**: This function returns a new instance of the original object, effectively "breaking" all memory ties with the original object. This approach creates a shallow copy of the object, but it's not necessarily a deep copy.

**Options compared**

The benchmark is comparing these two approaches because they have different performance characteristics:

* **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))**: This method is generally faster for creating deep copies, especially for larger objects, since it uses the `JSON.stringify()` function to serialize the object and then parses the resulting string back into a JSON object. However, this approach can be slower for smaller objects due to the overhead of serializing and deserializing.
* **memBreak(obj)**: This method is generally faster for creating shallow copies, but it's not suitable for deep copying since it only creates a new instance of the original object without recursively cloning its properties.

**Pros and cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))**:
	+ Pros: Fast for large objects, handles recursive data structures correctly.
	+ Cons: Can be slower for small objects due to serialization overhead.
* **memBreak(obj)**:
	+ Pros: Fast for shallow copies, easy to implement.
	+ Cons: Not suitable for deep copying since it only creates a new instance of the original object.

**Library and special JS feature**

The benchmark uses the `Lodash` library, which provides the `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()` functions. These functions are built-in in modern JavaScript engines, but Lodash can be useful when working with older versions of browsers or environments that don't have these functions available natively.

There is no special JS feature being used in this benchmark beyond what's provided by the `Lodash` library.

**Other alternatives**

If you need to create a deep copy of an object in JavaScript, there are other approaches besides using `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))`. Some popular alternatives include:

* Using the `Array.prototype.slice()` method with a recursive function: `myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj));`
* Using a library like Immer or React's `useMemo` hook to create a deep copy of an object.
* Using a simple iterative approach with a loop and recursion.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs and performance characteristics, which may vary depending on the specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

test thji (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: stringify vs memBreak

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

stringify

memBreak

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):