Benchmark: Clone Deep vs JSON Parse Test

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.min.js" integrity="sha256-VeNaFBVDhoX3H+gJ37DpT/nTuZTdjYro9yBruHjVmoQ=" crossorigin="anonymous"></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 parse clone
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json parse 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 benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches for creating a deep copy of an object: `lodash.cloneDeep` and `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`. The benchmark uses a sample JavaScript object, `MyObject`, which contains nested objects and properties.

**Library Usage: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library that provides various functions for working with data structures, such as arrays, objects, and more. In this benchmark, the `_.cloneDeep` function is used to create a deep copy of the input object.

The library's purpose is to provide a concise and expressive way to perform common tasks in JavaScript, freeing developers from writing boilerplate code. Lodash provides over 100 functions for various tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more.

**Special JS Feature: JSON Stringification/Parse**

JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) is a lightweight data interchange format that's widely used for exchanging data between web servers, web applications, and mobile apps. In this benchmark, `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()` are used to serialize and deserialize the input object.

The `JSON.stringify()` function converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string, which can be sent over a network or stored in a file. The `JSON.parse()` function does the opposite: it takes a JSON string as input and returns a JavaScript object.

**Performance Comparison**

The benchmark measures the execution time of both approaches for creating a deep copy of the input object. The results show that `lodash.cloneDeep` is faster than `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`. This is because `_.cloneDeep()` is implemented in C++ and optimized for performance, whereas `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` involves two additional steps: stringification and parsing.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash.cloneDeep**: Pros:
	+ Faster execution time
	+ More efficient memory usage
	+ Less prone to errors due to its implementation in C++
	Cons:
	+ Additional dependency on the Lodash library
* **JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))**: Pros:
	+ No additional dependencies or libraries required
	+ Simple and concise implementation
	Cons:
	+ Slower execution time
	+ More memory usage due to stringification and parsing

**Other Alternatives**

If you need a lightweight alternative to `lodash.cloneDeep`, you can consider using the built-in `Object.assign()` method, which creates a shallow copy of an object. However, for deep copying, it's recommended to use a dedicated library like Lodash or a custom implementation.

Another option is to use the `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` approach with some modifications to support deep copying, such as using a recursive function to handle nested objects.

**Additional Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the following factors:

* Performance: If speed is critical, choose `lodash.cloneDeep`.
* Memory usage: If memory efficiency is important, choose `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`.
* Dependency on libraries: If you prefer to avoid external dependencies, choose `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))`.

Related benchmarks:

Clone Deep vs JSON Parse Test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json parse clone

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json parse 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):