Benchmark: Lodash CloneDeep vs Immer Produce with heavy load

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/immer@3.1.3/dist/immer.umd.min.js"></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

state =  {
    data: {
      data1: {
        data2: 'test',
      },
      data3: Array.from({length: 1000}).map(() => document.createElement('div'))
    }
  };

Tests:

Produce
const result = immer.produce(state, draft => { draft.data.data1.data2 = 'updated' })
CloneDeep
const result = _.cloneDeep(state); result.data.data1.data2 = 'updated';

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Produce
CloneDeep

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case for measuring the performance of two different approaches: Immer's `produce` function and Lodash's `cloneDeep` function.

**What is being tested?**

In this benchmark, we have a complex data structure `state`, which consists of an object `data` with multiple nested objects and arrays. The goal is to update the value of `data.data1.data2` using two different approaches:

1. Immer's `produce` function: This function creates a new copy of the original data structure, allowing us to safely mutate it without affecting the original.
2. Lodash's `cloneDeep` function: This function creates a deep clone of the original data structure, which can be used to create a new independent copy.

**Options being compared**

We are comparing two options:

1. **Immer's produce**: Immer is a library that provides immutable data structures and functions for working with them. `produce` is a specific function that creates a new copy of the original data structure, allowing us to update it without affecting the original.
2. **Lodash's cloneDeep**: Lodash is a utility library that provides various functions for working with data, including cloning and mutating. `cloneDeep` is a specific function that creates a deep clone of the original data structure.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Immer's produce**

Pros:

* Immutability ensures thread-safety and prevents unexpected side effects.
* Can be more efficient than cloning, especially for large data structures.

Cons:

* Creates a new copy of the data structure, which can be memory-intensive.
* May not be suitable for very large or complex data structures due to performance overhead.

**Lodash's cloneDeep**

Pros:

* Provides a deep clone of the original data structure, allowing for independent updates.
* Can be more flexible than Immer's produce, as it allows for arbitrary mutations.

Cons:

* Cloning can be memory-intensive and slow for very large data structures.
* May not ensure immutability, leading to unexpected side effects if not used carefully.

**Other considerations**

When using either approach, consider the following:

* Make sure to use `produce` with caution when working with very large or complex data structures, as it can lead to performance issues.
* Use `cloneDeep` with care when updating large data structures, as it can consume a significant amount of memory.

**Library and its purpose**

Immer is a library that provides immutable data structures and functions for working with them. Its primary goal is to help developers write more predictable, reliable, and concurrent code.

Lodash is a utility library that provides various functions for working with data, including cloning, mutating, and transforming. Its primary goal is to provide a comprehensive set of tools for common data-related tasks.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard language features provided by the browsers and Node.js environments used to run it.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Produce	723061.8 Ops/sec
CloneDeep	2328.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash CloneDeep vs Immer Produce with heavy load (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Produce vs CloneDeep

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Produce

CloneDeep

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):