i completely agree about adding update to core. i've added it my utils
library and i use it all the time.
here's a slightly different implementation of update that takes a variable
number of args (like update-in).
(defn update
"Update value in map where f is a function that takes the old valu
On Dec 15, 6:12 am, Mark Engelberg wrote:
> One thing I've argued for in the past, but got no traction:
> We have:
> get-in, get
> assoc-in, assoc
> update-in, ?
> Let's add update to go with update-in.
update should really be in there. I always try to write update then i
remember that I have to
On Dec 14, 8:52 pm, ka wrote:
> user=> (get-in m [])
> {:a {:b {:c 10, :c1 20}, :b1 90}, :a1 100}
This seems strange to me. I would expect Clojure to return nil, as
there is no key in there that is nil. Assuming that an empty vector is
the same as asking for a nil key, that is.
(I suppose it ma
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Mark Engelberg
wrote:
> One thing I've argued for in the past, but got no traction:
> We have:
> get-in, get
> assoc-in, assoc
> update-in, ?
> Let's add update to go with update-in.
Let's give them absolutely no excuse like "we don't have time to write
the code
One thing I've argued for in the past, but got no traction:
We have:
get-in, get
assoc-in, assoc
update-in, ?
Let's add update to go with update-in.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegro
The functions get-in, assoc-in, update-in are really useful. Just
wanted to share a thoughts.
user=> (def m {:a {:b {:c 10 :c1 20} :b1 90} :a1 100})
#'user/m
1. Lets see the behavior of these functions in the corner case of
empty keyseq:
user=> (get-in m [])
{:a {:b {:c 10, :c1 20}, :b1 90}, :a1
