Benchmark: Deep copy benchmark 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script>
  function recursiveDeepCopy(o) {
    var newO,
      i;
  
    if (typeof o !== 'object') {
      return o;
    }
    if (!o) {
      return o;
    }
  
    if ('[object Array]' === Object.prototype.toString.apply(o)) {
      newO = [];
      for (i = 0; i < o.length; i += 1) {
        newO[i] = recursiveDeepCopy(o[i]);
      }
      return newO;
    }
  
    newO = {};
    for (i in o) {
      if (o.hasOwnProperty(i)) {
        newO[i] = recursiveDeepCopy(o[i]);
      }
    }
    return newO;
  }
                               </script>

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {"Id":"webtracker-sessions","Name":"Sessions","DataSources":[{"Id":1,"EndPointUrl":"https://d2insightsrestapi4620170917123759.azurewebsites.net/api/v2/timechart/session/visits","EndPointRequestType":"post","Name":"Sessions"}],"ChartType":"XTime","HasAnnotations":true,"DefaultTitle":"Sessions","Visualizations":[{"DataSourceId":1,"Type":"timebar","Events":[],"Index":1}],"Configurables":[{"Grouping":"Date & Time","Configurables":[{"Name":"Date Range","Type":"datetime-range","RequestParameters":["StartDate","EndDate"],"Variable":"dates[]"},{"Name":"Atomicity","Type":"time-atomicity","RequestParameters":"Atomicity","Variable":"atomicity"},{"Name":"Timeframe Compare Date Range","Type":"timeframe-compare-datetime-range","RequestParameters":["CompareStartDate","CompareEndDate"],"Variable":"timeframeCompare"}]},{"Name":"Color","Type":"colors","Variable":"varia-series-color[]"},{"Name":"Include","Variable":"Include","Type":"tag","RequestParameters":"Include","Hide":false},{"Name":"Exclude","Variable":"Exclude","Type":"tag","RequestParameters":"Exclude","Hide":false}],"AlternateCharts":[{"ChartDefinitionId":"webtracker-sessions-timeline","DisplayName":"View as timeline"}]}

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

lodash clone deep
var myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
JSON parse stringify
var myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));
Recursive deep copy
var myCopy = recursiveDeepCopy(MyObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash clone deep
JSON parse stringify
Recursive deep copy

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different methods for creating a deep copy of an object: Lodash's `cloneDeep` function, `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))`, and a custom recursive function. The benchmark creates a complex object `MyObject` with nested properties and then tests each method to create a deep copy of this object.

**Options Compared**

The three options being compared are:

1. **Lodash's `cloneDeep` function**: A popular utility library that provides a simple way to create deep copies of objects.
2. **`JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))`**: A built-in JavaScript method that attempts to create a deep copy of an object by serializing it to JSON and then parsing the JSON back into an object.
3. **Custom recursive function**: A homemade implementation of a recursive function to create a deep copy of the object.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash's `cloneDeep` function**:
	* Pros: Fast, efficient, and well-tested.
	* Cons: Requires an additional library dependency (Lodash).
2. **`JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))`**:
	* Pros: Built-in JavaScript method, no dependencies required.
	* Cons: Can be slow and inefficient for large objects due to the serialization and parsing process.
3. **Custom recursive function**:
	* Pros: No additional dependencies required, can be highly customizable.
	* Cons: Requires manual implementation of a recursive function, which can be error-prone.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses Lodash's `cloneDeep` function in its first test case. This library provides a convenient and efficient way to create deep copies of objects. The custom recursive function is not shown in the provided code snippet, but it would typically involve manually implementing a recursive function to traverse the object tree.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require additional explanation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative deep copy methods, some other options include:

* Using `Object.assign()` with the spread operator (`...`): `var myCopy = Object.assign({}, MyObject);`
* Using a library like `immer` or `redux-immutable` for immutable object manipulation
* Implementing a custom deep copy function using a loop and recursion

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and dependency requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; rv:104.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/104.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 104 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash clone deep	70224.0 Ops/sec
JSON parse stringify	112733.8 Ops/sec
Recursive deep copy	176974.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Deep copy benchmark 2 (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: lodash clone deep vs JSON parse stringify vs Recursive deep copy

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash clone deep

JSON parse stringify

Recursive deep copy

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):