Run results for: Ramda vs. Lodash vs Lodash fp What

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/81.0.4044.138 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome 81

Operating system: Windows

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: 4 years ago

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	274804.8 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition	376391.9 Ops/sec
Fast Clone	211177.4 Ops/sec

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.rawgit.com/ivolovikov/fastest-clone/master/index.js"></script>
<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/lodash@4(lodash.min.js+lodash.fp.min.js)'></script>

Script Preparation code:

// intial data
var source = {a:1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1,h:{a:-1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1}};
var fp = _.noConflict();

Tests:

Lodash
var result = _.cloneDeep(source); // adding checking to prevent compiler optimization if (result.h.a != -1) throw new Error('Object not clonned'); result.h.a = Math.random();
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
var result = R.clone(source); // adding checking to prevent compiler optimization if (result.h.a != -1) throw new Error('Object not clonned'); result.h.a = Math.random();
Fast Clone
var result = fp.cloneDeep(source); // adding checking to prevent compiler optimization if (result.h.a != -1) throw new Error('Object not clonned'); result.h.a = Math.random();

Run results for: Ramda vs. Lodash vs Lodash fp What

Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs Ramda vs Fastest Clone.

Lodash

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Fast Clone