Use a faster deepcopy library

[Juneezee]

PR Details

Description

Related Issue

Closes #2029.

Motivation and Context

Benchmark:

package excelize

import (
	"testing"

	olddeepcopy "github.com/mohae/deepcopy"
	newdeepcopy "github.com/tiendc/go-deepcopy"
)

func BenchmarkCopyXlsxCol(b *testing.B) {
	src := xlsxCol{}

	b.Run("old", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			olddeepcopy.Copy(src)
		}
	})

	b.Run("new", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			var dst xlsxCol
			newdeepcopy.Copy(&dst, src)
		}
	})
}

func BenchmarkCopyXlsxRow(b *testing.B) {
	src := xlsxRow{}

	b.Run("old", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			olddeepcopy.Copy(src)
		}
	})

	b.Run("new", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			var dst xlsxRow
			newdeepcopy.Copy(&dst, src)
		}
	})
}

func BenchmarkCopyXlsxWorksheet(b *testing.B) {
	f, err := prepareTestBook1()
	if err != nil {
		b.Fatal(err)
	}

	idx, err := f.NewSheet("CopySheet")
	if err != nil {
		b.Fatal(err)
	}

	fromSheet := f.GetSheetName(idx)
	src, err := f.workSheetReader(fromSheet)
	if err != nil {
		b.Fatal(err)
	}

	b.Run("old", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			olddeepcopy.Copy(src)
		}
	})

	b.Run("new", func(b *testing.B) {
		for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
			var dst xlsxWorksheet
			newdeepcopy.Copy(&dst, src)
		}
	})
}

Result:

goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/xuri/excelize/v2
cpu: AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750U with Radeon Graphics
BenchmarkCopyXlsxCol/old-16      	  446193	      2483 ns/op	     224 B/op	      13 allocs/op
BenchmarkCopyXlsxCol/new-16      	  963056	      1148 ns/op	     128 B/op	       3 allocs/op
BenchmarkCopyXlsxRow/old-16      	  344492	      3135 ns/op	     344 B/op	      16 allocs/op
BenchmarkCopyXlsxRow/new-16      	  909142	      1371 ns/op	     192 B/op	       3 allocs/op
BenchmarkCopyXlsxWorksheet/old-16         	   49108	     23097 ns/op	    3656 B/op	     128 allocs/op
BenchmarkCopyXlsxWorksheet/new-16         	  176534	      7085 ns/op	     808 B/op	       6 allocs/op
PASS
ok  	github.com/xuri/excelize/v2	7.377s

How Has This Been Tested

Types of changes

• Docs change / refactoring / dependency upgrade
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.20%. Comparing base (5f446f2) to head (1e5744d).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2030   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.20%   99.20%           
=======================================
  Files          32       32           
  Lines       29952    29958    +6     
=======================================
+ Hits        29714    29720    +6     
  Misses        158      158           
  Partials       80       80           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	99.20% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[xuri]

LGTM, thanks for your contribution.

[arp242]

Did anyone audit this library?

The previous library was unmaintained, but it was simple, worked, and was trusted. This is a random project from more or less a random person without any reputation that I can see. While I'm 99% sure it's fine, that's not 100%. I'm not very enthusiastic bringing this in our dependency tree.

And we're talking about nanoseconds here. The benchmarks didn't really demonstrate this makes a meaningful difference.

[xuri]

Thanks for your comments, although the new deepcopy library not popular and not widely used currently, but after I checked the code of that, it seems fine. I think if bug reports before next release of excelize, we can revert this or using encoding/gob for deepcopy. @Juneezee what you think of this?