Benchmark: Spread vs structuredClone no nest

Tests:

Spread
var theJSON = { "squadName": "Super hero squad", "homeTown": "Metro City", "formed": 2016, "secretBase": "Super tower", "active": true } var result = {...theJSON}
JSON structuredClone
var theJSON = { "squadName": "Super hero squad", "homeTown": "Metro City", "formed": 2016, "secretBase": "Super tower", "active": true } var result = structuredClone(theJSON)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Spread
JSON structuredClone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days 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 is comparing the performance of two approaches to create a shallow copy of a JSON object: using the spread operator (`...`) and `structuredClone()` function.

**Options Being Compared**

1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: This syntax creates a new object with the same keys as the original object, but with values set to `undefined`. The purpose is to create a shallow copy of the JSON object.
2. **structuredClone() function**: This is a modern JavaScript method introduced in ECMAScript 2020, which creates a deep clone of an object, including all its properties and nested objects.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	* Pros: Simple to use, widely supported across browsers and Node.js versions.
	* Cons: Creates a shallow copy, ignoring nested objects or arrays, which may not be the desired behavior in some cases.
2. **structuredClone() function**:
	* Pros: Creates a deep clone of the object, preserving all properties and nested structures.
	* Cons: May have performance implications due to the cloning process, and is only supported in modern browsers ( Firefox 113+ ) and Node.js versions.

**Other Considerations**

When deciding between these two approaches, consider the requirements of your use case:

* If you need a shallow copy with some flexibility (e.g., ignoring certain properties), the spread operator might be sufficient.
* If you require a deep clone with all properties preserved, `structuredClone()` is likely a better choice.

**Library Used**

None. The benchmark uses built-in JavaScript features: `...` and `structuredClone()`

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

No special syntax or feature is being tested in this benchmark. It's focused solely on comparing the performance of these two approaches to create a shallow copy of a JSON object.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other ways to create a shallow copy of a JSON object include:

1. Using `Object.assign()`: Creates a new object with the same keys as the original, but may have unexpected behavior if the values are not objects.
2. Using a library like Lodash's `cloneDeep()` or Immutable.js: These libraries provide more robust and flexible cloning solutions, but may introduce additional dependencies.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might offer better performance or more comprehensive features than the spread operator alone.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/113.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 113 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Spread	5235210.5 Ops/sec
JSON structuredClone	455307.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Spread vs structuredClone no nest (version: 0)

Benchmarks spread vs structuredClone no nest

Comparing performance of: Spread vs JSON structuredClone

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Spread

JSON structuredClone

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):