Benchmark: lodash merge vs deepmerge1

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://unpkg.com/deepmerge@3.2.0/dist/umd.js'></script>

Tests:

lodash merge
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', c: { a: 'a', b: { c: 'c' } } }; var b = { c: { b: { d: 'a' }, c: { d: 'd' } } }; var c = _.merge({}, a, b);
object.assign
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', c: { a: 'a', b: { c: 'c' } } }; var b = { c: { b: { d: 'a' }, c: { d: 'd' } } }; var c = {...a, ...b};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash merge
object.assign

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:76.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/76.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 76 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash merge	295310.9 Ops/sec
object.assign	3652790.0 Ops/sec

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.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of two functions: `_.merge` from the Lodash library and the `object.assign` method. The test cases compare these two functions for merging objects with similar structures, but slightly different nesting levels.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

1. **Lodash `_` (`.merge`)**: A popular utility library that provides a set of functional programming helpers, including the `_.merge` function.
2. **`object.assign` method**: A built-in JavaScript method for merging objects.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

* **Lodash `_` (.merge)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Widely adopted and well-maintained library.
		- Provides a flexible and efficient way to merge objects with complex structures.
		- Can be used for other tasks beyond mere object merging (e.g., functional programming).
	+ Cons:
		- Requires an additional library dependency.
		- May have a slight performance overhead due to the added abstraction layer.
* **`object.assign` method**:
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in and optimized for performance, reducing memory usage.
		- No external dependencies required.
	+ Cons:
		- Limited support for merging complex objects with deep nesting levels.
		- May be slower than the Lodash implementation due to the overhead of calling a built-in method.

**Library Usage**

The `deepmerge` library (version 3.2.0) is used in one of the test cases, which provides an alternative way to merge objects with deep nesting levels. However, this library is not used in the other test case using `object.assign`.

**JavaScript Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmarks beyond the basic use of object merging and assignment.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to compare performance between different object merging strategies or explore alternative libraries for deep object merging, some alternatives include:

* **Ramda**: A functional programming library that includes a `ramda.merge` function.
* **Immer**: A library specifically designed for efficient state management and object updates using the immutable data structure approach.
* **Object.assign` variants**: Some modern browsers (e.g., Chrome) provide optimized implementations of `object.assign`, such as the `assignIn` method, which can offer better performance in certain scenarios.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on your specific use case and requirements. Always consider factors like performance, memory usage, code complexity, and maintainability when choosing an object merging strategy or library.

Related benchmarks:

lodash merge vs deepmerge1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash merge vs object.assign

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash merge

object.assign

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):