Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs naive JSON.stringify vs produce

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js' ></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/immer@9.0.21/dist/immer.umd.production.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...'
  }
};

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject); myCopy.jayson.parse = "something else";
Native structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject); myCopy.jayson.parse = "something else";
JSON.stringify
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject)); myCopy.jayson.parse = "something else";
Immer Produce
const result = immer.produce(MyObject, draft => { draft.jayson.parse = "something else" });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Native structuredClone
JSON.stringify
Immer Produce

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 what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares four different approaches to create a deep copy of an object:

1. Lodash `cloneDeep`
2. Native `structuredClone` (a new API introduced in JavaScript)
3. `JSON.stringify` and then parsing back with `JSON.parse`
4. Immer's `produce` function

**Options Being Compared**

Here are the options being compared, along with their pros and cons:

1. **Lodash `cloneDeep`**
	* Pros: Well-established library, fast, and widely supported.
	* Cons: Requires an additional library (Lodash), may not be optimal for large objects.
2. **Native `structuredClone`**
	* Pros: Fast, modern, and optimized for performance.
	* Cons: Requires a recent JavaScript engine (ECMAScript 2020+) and may have compatibility issues with older browsers or environments.
3. **JSON.stringify + JSON.parse**
	* Pros: Widely supported, simple to implement, and works across all browsers and environments.
	* Cons: Can be slower than other options, especially for large objects, due to the overhead of parsing and stringifying.
4. **Immer's `produce` function**
	* Pros: Optimized for mutation-heavy updates, fast, and integrates well with Immer's immutable state management library.
	* Cons: Requires an additional library (Immer), may not be suitable for simple deep copying tasks.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing a deep copying method, consider the following factors:

* Performance: If speed is crucial, `structuredClone` or Lodash `cloneDeep` might be good options.
* Compatibility: If you need to support older browsers or environments, JSON.stringify + JSON.parse or Lodash `cloneDeep` might be better choices.
* Library dependencies: Be aware of the additional libraries required (e.g., Lodash or Immer) and their potential impact on your project's size and complexity.

**Special JS Features/ Syntax**

None of the test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax that would require a deep understanding of modern JavaScript. However, it's worth noting that `structuredClone` relies on ECMAScript 2020+, which might not be widely supported yet.

**Library Descriptions**

1. **Lodash**: A popular utility library for functional programming tasks, including deep copying.
2. **Immer**: An immutable state management library that provides the `produce` function for efficient updates.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in this benchmark!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/104.0.5112.126 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 104 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash cloneDeep	493247.0 Ops/sec
Native structuredClone	179266.3 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	306539.5 Ops/sec
Immer Produce	94412.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs naive JSON.stringify vs produce (version: 13)

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/structuredClone

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone vs JSON.stringify vs Immer Produce

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Native structuredClone

JSON.stringify

Immer Produce

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):