Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@ahtcx
Last active June 9, 2024 14:56
Show Gist options
  • Save ahtcx/0cd94e62691f539160b32ecda18af3d6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save ahtcx/0cd94e62691f539160b32ecda18af3d6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Deep-Merge JavaScript objects with ES6
// ⚠ IMPORTANT: this is old and doesn't work for many different edge cases but I'll keep it as-is for any of you want it
// ⚠ IMPORTANT: you can find more robust versions in the comments or use a library implementation such as lodash's `merge`
// Merge a `source` object to a `target` recursively
const merge = (target, source) => {
// Iterate through `source` properties and if an `Object` set property to merge of `target` and `source` properties
for (const key of Object.keys(source)) {
if (source[key] instanceof Object) Object.assign(source[key], merge(target[key], source[key]))
}
// Join `target` and modified `source`
Object.assign(target || {}, source)
return target
}
const merge=(t,s)=>{const o=Object,a=o.assign;for(const k of o.keys(s))s[k]instanceof o&&a(s[k],merge(t[k],s[k]));return a(t||{},s),t}
@Eunomiac
Copy link

Eunomiac commented Feb 9, 2022

For those who want a deep merge function that only mutates the original target if given permission, I've updated (and simplified) my earlier solution to make use of @Pomax 's great use of __proto__ constructors (something I know less than nothing about). I did decide to retain the original target, source ordering of the parameters, as it aligns with Object.assign() and I intuit merge() to be more similar to that than to needle/haystack search functions --- totally a matter of personal opinion, of course!

(I also decided to separate the cloneObj() and merge() functions, as the former is quite useful on its own and doesn't need to clutter up the latter's function body.)

function clone(obj, isStrictlySafe = false) {
  /* Clones an object. First attempt is safe. If it errors (e.g. from a circular reference),
        'isStrictlySafe' determines if error is thrown or an unsafe clone is returned. */
  try {
    return JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj));
  } catch(err) {
    if (isStrictlySafe) { throw new Error(err) }
    console.warn(`Unsafe clone of object`, obj);
    return {...obj};
  }
}

function merge(target, source, {isMutatingOk = false, isStrictlySafe = false} = {}) {
  /* Returns a deep merge of source into target.
        Does not mutate target unless isMutatingOk = true. */
  target = isMutatingOk ? target : clone(target, isStrictlySafe);
  for (const [key, val] of Object.entries(source)) {
    if (val !== null && typeof val === `object`) {
      if (target[key] === undefined) {
        target[key] = new val.__proto__.constructor();
      }
      /* even where isMutatingOk = false, recursive calls only work on clones, so they can always
            safely mutate --- saves unnecessary cloning */
      target[key] = merge(target[key], val, {isMutatingOk: true, isStrictlySafe}); 
    } else {
      target[key] = val;
    }
  }
  return target;
}

@Pomax If you happen by here somewhere along the line and are in a sharing mood, I'd love to hear your insights on the above --- I'm still learning JavaScript and am rabid for any pearls of wisdom I can find! :) (Oh, and that obviously goes for anyone else who happens by and has pearls to cast before... uh, me!)

@Pomax
Copy link

Pomax commented Feb 14, 2022

@Eunomiac if you're making the behaviour contingent on an explicit argument, there's no need for a console warn, but I would make that an options object for clone (for a single property) to align it with your merge. A bigger issue is that you're using the JSON mechanism for cloning, but JSON cannot represent arbitrary JS objects because it's intended for data transport only, so non-data like symbols and functions end up getting ignored by JSON.stringify. While you can use the JSON.parse(JSON.stringify)) trick as a one liner to clone a pure data object, it is not suitable for deep cloning JS objects.

Finally, note that if you have merge, clone is basically a fallthrough function:

function merge(target = {}, source={}) {
  // this does not need to rely on clone
  // ...code goes here...
  return target;
}

function clone(obj) {
  // this doesn't need its own code: cloning is the same as merging into an empty object
  return merge({}, obj);
}

@Eunomiac
Copy link

Eunomiac commented Feb 17, 2022

@Pomax Thanks a ton for taking the time to explain, I really appreciate it!

I was aware of the limitations of the parse/stringify trick in terms of losing anything that wasn't pure data, I just kind of accepted that as a necessary limitation of cloning (I actually stole the trick out of Underscore.js's library -- it's how their _.clone() method works -- and so I assumed that was the "best way" to do it).

But your way is definitely superior, as I'd love to convert my un-mutating merge function into one that performs an actual full deep clone, including of non-data properties.

I do have a few hopefully-quick follow-up questions, if you'd be so kind:

  1. Is there anything your method won't accurately clone? I'm thinking of things like getters/setters, class definitions, or more exotic function definitions like generators and whatnot?

  2. The "merge into an empty object" trick is so elegant and obvious in hindsight, I can't believe it never occurred to me. Am I right in concluding that, to take your original function and make it return a merged object without mutating the target, all I need to do is merge the target into an empty object at the top of the function (... with {isMutatingOk: true}, to avoid an infinite loop)?

  3. Would it be better to use new target.__proto__.constructor() instead of {} as the first parameter in the clone() function, to allow for merging array objects as well?

@Pomax
Copy link

Pomax commented May 10, 2022

  1. if you want to deep clone classed objects, you need to set the correct prototype on the resulting cloned object
  2. not sure why you'd get an infinite loop at all? copy(source) falls through to merge({}, source), but a regular merge you want to update the target, you don't want a new object at all. However, for the times that you really do, merge(copy(target), source) is always an option since we have that copy function =)
  3. always tricky, as you have no guarantee that the constructor will even run without any arguments. Copying as plain object first, and then forcing the original prototype on, is generally more likely to succeed, but you do miss out on whatever side-effects the constructor might have. There is no universal solution here unfortunately.

@Rehanmp
Copy link

Rehanmp commented Sep 15, 2022

let target = {...existing,...newdata};
This code will be more than enough to merge the data by using javascript.

@enten
Copy link

enten commented Oct 15, 2022

let target = {...existing,...newdata}; This code will be more than enough to merge the data by using javascript.

As explain by @ahtcx , this gist is old. But its purpose is to merge objects deeply.
The gist {...existing,...newdata} operates a non-deep merge: it's not the same purpose.

@pkit
Copy link

pkit commented Apr 18, 2023

@rmp0101

let target = {...existing,...newdata}; This code will be more than enough to merge the data by using javascript.

What part of the word deep you don't understand?

@TacticalSystem
Copy link

Very usefull! If someone wants to use more than of two objects you can combine this function with Array.reduce() and an array of objects.
[{}, {}, {}].reduce((ci, ni) => merge(ci, ni), {})

@gavin-lb
Copy link

gavin-lb commented Jun 9, 2023

Non-mutating deep merge and copy, making use of the newish structuredClone function for the copying

function deepMerge(target, source) {
  const result = { ...target, ...source };
  for (const key of Object.keys(result)) {
    result[key] =
      typeof target[key] == 'object' && typeof source[key] == 'object'
        ? deepMerge(target[key], source[key])
        : structuredClone(result[key]);
  }
  return result;
}

(some more care would be needed if you need to handle Arrays)

@Pomax
Copy link

Pomax commented Jun 30, 2023

note that structuredClone still requires you to do prototype assignment for classed/prototyped objects, though. That doesn't come free.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment