Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone (Number, Boolean, Object, Array, String, Null)

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 = {
  string: 'Creates a deep copy of source, which should be an object or an array.',
  number: 1234567890,
  boolean: true,
  nullable: null,
  json: {
    stringify: 'JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string....',
    parse: 'JSON.parse() method parses a JSON string...'
  },
  array: [
    {
      id: 5,
      blocked: false,
      avatar: null,
      user: {
        firstName: 'Alan',
        lastName: 'Walker'
      },
    },
    {
      id: 5688,
      blocked: false,
      avatar: null,
      user: {
        firstName: 'Anna',
        lastName: 'Wanderwood'
      },
    },
    {
      id: 80043,
      blocked: true,
      avatar: 'image.jpg',
      user: {
        firstName: 'Serj',
        lastName: 'Cooper'
      },
    },
  ]
};

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Json 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 clone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash cloneDeep	386460.7 Ops/sec
Json clone	455773.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is a complex task, and MeasuratThat.net provides a valuable platform for comparing different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided benchmark compares the execution times of two methods to create a deep copy of an object:

1. `_.cloneDeep(MyObject)` (Lodash cloneDeep)
2. `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))` (JSON clone)

**Comparison of options**

Both methods are used to create a deep copy of the input object, but they have different approaches.

* **Lodash cloneDeep**: This method uses a recursive approach to create a deep copy of the object. It traverses the object's properties and creates new objects with identical structures.
	+ Pros: Can handle complex objects with nested arrays and objects.
	+ Cons: May be slower for very large objects due to the overhead of recursive function calls.
* **JSON clone**: This method uses `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()` to serialize the object to a string, which is then parsed back into an object. This approach can create a shallow copy, which may not work as expected for deeply nested objects.
	+ Pros: Can be faster for small to medium-sized objects due to the simplicity of the approach.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly for complex objects with nested arrays and objects.

**Other considerations**

* **Object structure**: The choice of method depends on the object's structure. For simple objects, `JSON clone` may be sufficient. However, for more complex objects, `Lodash cloneDeep` is recommended.
* **Performance**: If performance is a critical concern, benchmarking both methods is essential to determine which one performs better in your specific use case.

**Library and purpose**

* Lodash: A popular JavaScript library that provides utility functions for functional programming, including the `cloneDeep()` method.
	+ Purpose: To provide a simple and efficient way to create deep copies of objects.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned. Both methods are standard JavaScript approaches.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for creating deep copies of objects include:

* Using libraries like `immer` or `copy-deep`
* Implementing a custom recursive function
* Using a third-party library like `deepcopy`

Keep in mind that the choice of method depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone (Number, Boolean, Object, Array, String, Null) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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