Benchmark: Immer vs shallow vs ramda assocPath (nested structure light)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://unpkg.com/immer@9.0.7/dist/immer.umd.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var { assocPath } = R

var object = { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3, four: 4, five: 5, array: Array.from({ length: 10000 }).map(() => Math.random()) }

var INITIAL_DATA = {
  one: { two: { three: { four: { five: 5, object }, object }, object }, object },
  two: { three: { four: { five: 5, object }, object }, object },
  three: { four: { five: 5, object }, object },
  four: { five: 5, object },
  five: 5
}

var produce = immer.default

Tests:

immer
data = produce(INITIAL_DATA, draft => { draft.four.five = 0; })
shallow copy
data = { four: { five: 0, ...INITIAL_DATA.four }, ...INITIAL_DATA }
ramda assocPath
data = assocPath(['four', 'five'], 0, INITIAL_DATA)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
immer
shallow copy
ramda assocPath

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to update a nested object:

1. **Immer**: A library that provides a simple way to create immutable objects by creating a new copy of an existing object.
2. **Shallow Copy**: A basic approach where a new object is created and its properties are copied from the original object using object spread (`{ ...INITIAL_DATA }`).
3. **Ramda assocPath**: A function from the Ramda library that allows you to access nested objects by specifying their path.

**Benchmark Test Cases**

The test cases compare the performance of each approach:

* **Immer**: The benchmark uses Immer's `produce` function to create a new copy of the initial data with a specific update.
* **Shallow Copy**: A basic object spread is used to create a shallow copy of the initial data with an updated value in one of its properties.
* **Ramda assocPath**: This approach uses Ramda's `assocPath` function to access and update a nested object by specifying its path.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **Immer**:
	* Pros: Simple, intuitive API, efficient for large objects.
	* Cons: Creates an entirely new copy of the original data, which can be memory-intensive.
2. **Shallow Copy**:
	* Pros: Lightweight, easy to implement, suitable for small objects or updates.
	* Cons: Updates are shallow (only affects top-level properties), may not preserve nested object relationships.
3. **Ramda assocPath**:
	* Pros: Flexible, allows for precise control over path updates, efficient for large objects.
	* Cons: Requires familiarity with Ramda's API, may be slower due to the function call overhead.

**Library and Syntax**

The benchmark uses:

* **Immer**: A JavaScript library that provides immutable data structures. The `produce` function creates a new copy of an object by specifying an update function.
* **Ramda**: A functional programming library that provides various utility functions, including `assocPath`, which allows you to access nested objects.

No special JS features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

For large-scale data updates, alternative approaches like:

* **Propt**: A lightweight library that creates a shallow copy of an object while preserving existing properties.
* **Object.assign()`: Another way to create a shallow copy using the `Object.assign()` method.
* **Native array methods**: For updating arrays, you can use `slice()` and then assign the updated values.

These alternatives might not be as efficient or flexible as Immer's `produce` function or Ramda's `assocPath`, but they can be suitable for specific use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
immer	187275.5 Ops/sec
shallow copy	3327021.0 Ops/sec
ramda assocPath	1905698.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Immer vs shallow vs ramda assocPath (nested structure light) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: immer vs shallow copy vs ramda assocPath

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

immer

shallow copy

ramda assocPath

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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