I see. I tried to add more nested elements into my original structure but now the output isn't correct.
My question is: Is it possible to implement a generic algorithm with Zippers that could traverse as long as needed and update an item? Maybe I'm doing zippers wrong in this case. Thanks a lot for your time and your helpful answers. Now I started to understand zippers, thanks to you. On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 7:36:17 PM UTC+2, Moe Aboulkheir wrote: > > Hussein, > > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Hussein B. <hubag...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> 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.
