Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone Large object

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

​x
 
​
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {
  "_id": "5d89d740e050f13d5b65c172",
  "index": 0,
  "guid": "85ed8578-6498-4b91-bc46-71a0e56e0ea2",
  "isActive": false,
  "balance": "$3,626.01",
  "picture": "http://placehold.it/32x32",
  "age": 366,
  "eyeColor": "green",
  "name": "Oneil Byrd",
  "gender": "male",
  "company": "CEPRENE",
  "email": "oneilbyrd@ceprene.com",
  "phone": "+1 (929) 467-2238",
  "address": "688 Dunne Place, Walker, Rhode Island, 2210",
  "about": "Occaecat qui sit do reprehenderit ex proident excepteur officia adipisicing id do. Ut non ipsum ullamco reprehenderit duis mollit culpa adipisicing. Velit Lorem cupidatat incididunt cillum aliquip. Minim elit enim laboris duis deserunt incididunt culpa minim nisi.\r\n",
  "registered": "2017-04-19T11:07:55 -02:00",
  "latitude": 87.086108,
  "longitude": -35.085309,
  "tags": [
    "irure",
    "in",
    "ex",
    "eu",
    "id",
    "incididunt",
    "officia",
    "est",
    "id",
    "occaecat",
    "irure",
    "labore",
    "commodo",
    "adipisicing",
    "mollit",
    "esse",
    "do",
    "pariatur",
    "duis",
    "dolore",
    "ipsum",
    "voluptate",
    "nulla",
    "cupidatat",
    "dolore",
    "veniam",
    "ea"
  ],
  "friends": [
    {
      "id": 0,
      "name": "Minerva Hancock"
    },
    {
      "id": 1,
      "name": "Lucille Mckinney"
    },
    {
      "id": 2,
      "name": "Ursula Cummings"
    },
    {
      "id": 3,
      "name": "Juana Mann"
    },
    {
      "id": 4,
      "name": "Hubbard Martin"
    },
    {
      "id": 5,
      "name": "Cheryl Duffy"
    },
    {
      "id": 6,
      "name": "Workman Duran"
    },
    {
      "id": 7,
      "name": "Geneva Randolph"
    },
    {
      "id": 8,
      "name": "Nelson York"
    },
    {
      "id": 9,
      "name": "Powers Wyatt"
    },
    {
      "id": 10,
      "name": "Sophia Gilliam"
    },
    {
      "id": 11,
      "name": "Kidd Eaton"
    },
    {
      "id": 12,
      "name": "Caitlin Wall"
    }
  ],
  "greeting": "Hello, Oneil Byrd! You have 9 unread messages.",
  "favoriteFruit": "apple"
};

var myCopy = null;

 
var MyObject = {  "_id": "5d89d740e050f13d5b65c172",  "index": 0,  "guid": "85ed8578-6498-4b91-bc46-71a0e56e0ea2",  "isActive": false,  "balance": "$3,626.01",  "picture": "http://placehold.it/32x32",  "age": 366,  "eyeColor": "green",  "name": "Oneil Byrd",  "gender": "male",  "company": "CEPRENE",  "email": "oneilbyrd@ceprene.com",  "phone": "+1 (929) 467-2238",  "address": "688 Dunne Place, Walker, Rhode Island, 2210",  "about": "Occaecat qui sit do reprehenderit ex proident excepteur officia adipisicing id do. Ut non ipsum ullamco reprehenderit duis mollit culpa adipisicing. Velit Lorem cupidatat incididunt cillum aliquip. Minim elit enim laboris duis deserunt incididunt culpa minim nisi.\r\n",  "registered": "2017-04-19T11:07:55 -02:00",  "latitude": 87.086108,  "longitude": -35.085309,  "tags": [    "irure",    "in",    "ex",    "eu",    "id",    "incididunt",    "officia",    "est",    "id",    "occaecat",    "irure",    "labore",    "commodo",    "adipisicing",    "mollit",    "esse",    "do",    "pariatur",    "duis",    "dolore",    "ipsum",    "voluptate",    "nulla",    "cupidatat",    "dolore",    "veniam",    "ea"  ],  "friends": [    {      "id": 0,      "name": "Minerva Hancock"    },    {      "id": 1,      "name": "Lucille Mckinney"    },    {      "id": 2,      "name": "Ursula Cummings"    },    {      "id": 3,      "name": "Juana Mann"    },    {      "id": 4,      "name": "Hubbard Martin"    },    {      "id": 5,      "name": "Cheryl Duffy"    },    {      "id": 6,      "name": "Workman Duran"    },    {      "id": 7,      "name": "Geneva Randolph"    },    {      "id": 8,      "name": "Nelson York"    },    {      "id": 9,      "name": "Powers Wyatt"    },    {      "id": 10,      "name": "Sophia Gilliam"    },    {      "id": 11,      "name": "Kidd Eaton"    },    {      "id": 12,      "name": "Caitlin Wall"    }  ],  "greeting": "Hello, Oneil Byrd! You have 9 unread messages.",  "favoriteFruit": "apple"};​var myCopy = null;​

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash cloneDeep	83388.2 Ops/sec
Json clone	94136.6 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

Benchmark Definition and Preparation

The benchmark defines two test cases:

Lodash CloneDeep: This test case uses Lodash's cloneDeep function to create a deep copy of the MyObject JSON object.
JSON Clone: This test case uses the built-in JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject)) method to clone the MyObject JSON object.

Options Compared

The two options being compared are:

Lodash's cloneDeep function
The built-in JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject)) method

Pros and Cons of Each Approach

Lodash CloneDeep

Pros:

Creates a deep copy of the object, including nested arrays and objects.
Handles complex data structures, such as circular references.
Can be more efficient for large objects due to Lodash's optimized implementation.

Cons:

Requires an external library (Lodash) to be loaded in the browser.
May have a larger payload due to the inclusion of the Lodash library.

JSON Clone

Pros:

Does not require any additional libraries or payloads.
Is a built-in method, so it's likely to be optimized and efficient.

Cons:

Only creates a shallow copy of the object, which may not be sufficient for all use cases (e.g., nested arrays and objects).
Can be slower than Lodash's cloneDeep function due to its implementation details.

Library: Lodash

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a collection of utility functions. In this case, the cloneDeep function is used to create a deep copy of the MyObject JSON object. Lodash is widely adopted and well-maintained, making it a reliable choice for many developers.

Special JS Feature: None

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two specific implementation options.

Other Alternatives

If you wanted to test alternative cloning methods, some other options could be:

JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject)) with a recursive function (e.g., using a library like Underscore.js)
A custom cloning function implemented from scratch
Other libraries or frameworks that provide cloning functionality (e.g., Ramda)

However, for most use cases, Lodash's cloneDeep function and the built-in JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject)) method are likely to be sufficient.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition and Preparation**

The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. **Lodash CloneDeep**: This test case uses Lodash's `cloneDeep` function to create a deep copy of the `MyObject` JSON object.
2. **JSON Clone**: This test case uses the built-in `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))` method to clone the `MyObject` JSON object.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Lodash's `cloneDeep` function
* The built-in `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))` method

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Lodash CloneDeep**

Pros:

* Creates a deep copy of the object, including nested arrays and objects.
* Handles complex data structures, such as circular references.
* Can be more efficient for large objects due to Lodash's optimized implementation.

Cons:

* Requires an external library (Lodash) to be loaded in the browser.
* May have a larger payload due to the inclusion of the Lodash library.

**JSON Clone**

Pros:

* Does not require any additional libraries or payloads.
* Is a built-in method, so it's likely to be optimized and efficient.

Cons:

* Only creates a shallow copy of the object, which may not be sufficient for all use cases (e.g., nested arrays and objects).
* Can be slower than Lodash's `cloneDeep` function due to its implementation details.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a collection of utility functions. In this case, the `cloneDeep` function is used to create a deep copy of the `MyObject` JSON object. Lodash is widely adopted and well-maintained, making it a reliable choice for many developers.

**Special JS Feature: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two specific implementation options.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative cloning methods, some other options could be:

* `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))` with a recursive function (e.g., using a library like Underscore.js)
* A custom cloning function implemented from scratch
* Other libraries or frameworks that provide cloning functionality (e.g., Ramda)

However, for most use cases, Lodash's `cloneDeep` function and the built-in `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))` method are likely to be sufficient.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone Large object (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>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):