You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
- Replace Force.DeepCloner with FastCloner v3.4.4 (source imported)
- Add Update-FastCloner.ps1 script for source import automation
- Update ObjectExtensions.DeepClone to use FastClonerGenerator
- Add nullable annotations to DeepClone extension method
- Replace #if MODERN with #if true // MODERN for .NET 8+ targets
- Add benchmark comparison results
Benchmark results show FastCloner is 7-149% slower than DeepCloner
for our test cases, contrary to published benchmarks.
reduce to fastcloner vs deepcloner
internals
rebase
use generated fastcloner code
group benchmarks, simplify position tracking
work on perf
remove experiment
return original DeepCloner into source code until we sort this out for reproducible benchmarks
remove behaviors, add licenses
sync fastcloner
**FastCloner is consistently slower than DeepCloner** for our benchmark suite:
181
+
182
+
-**Small objects**: 27-149% slower
183
+
-**Medium objects**: 9-29% slower
184
+
-**Large objects**: 8-56% slower
185
+
-**Only exception**: DynamicWithArray is 9% faster
186
+
187
+
This contradicts FastCloner's published benchmarks which show ~25x improvement over DeepCloner. The published benchmarks likely use the source generator (`FastDeepClone()`) rather than reflection-based cloning.
0 commit comments