Hussein,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Hussein B. <hubaghd...@gmail.com> wrote: > But now the updated children is using list notation, not vector. Is it ok or > it is for displaying purposes? The collection type is now different, as the example I gave uses "reverse" as the transform, which is a generic sequence function - it doesn't care that it was passed a vector. It may not matter - it depends on how you're using the sequences. In this specific case, modifying the transform in the example to #(update % "children" (comp vec reverse)) will result in a vector, though there are more general ways of doing this without baking the collection type in everywhere (into (empty x) (reverse x)). Take care, Moe -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
