Jeremy L Thompson

Note - we don't write the forum software, so I don't think we can change this It looks like when the green border for online users is added, the distance...

One thing that I noticed is that our description of Step 6 less obviously calls out the nesting as a concept, which might be contributing to the confusion

What about this variant? It feels not quite there but gives us a bit of a different angle. Anecdotally, I have had good success by saying something like what I...

This challenge again. Mathematically there should be a wide range of possible solutions - I'm not wild about using eval but we could make a small parsing function to check...

I see what you are saying. Really, the challenge is asking you to replicate the effect of using push with the spread operator. I'm not sure what change to the...

I think we need to be careful. The intended behavior is better. We don't want the users to concat a reference to the second array.

If we want users to learn a "non mutating push", I think its better that the solution not provide an avenue to mutate the original arrays. ```javascript const first =...

I wouldn't change the expected behavior.. If we change the expected behavior, then this is no longer a non-mutating function. We should modify the description.

If you change the expected behavior, then if `newItem` is an array, the output of this function can be used to mutate `newItem`, as I explained above.

I don't see how this would be a simplification. The current solution works fine. Not changing the solution wouldn't make the task simpler - it would make it identical to...