Skip to main content


JavaScript Arrays are fully supported in Automerge. You can use push, unshift, insertAt, deleteAt, splice, loops, and nested objects.

newDoc = Automerge.change(currentDoc, doc => {
doc.list = [] // creates an empty list object
doc.list.push(2, 3)
doc.list.unshift(0, 1) // unshift() adds elements at the beginning
doc.list[3] = Math.PI // overwriting list element by index
// now doc.list is [0, 1, 2, 3.141592653589793]
// Looping over lists works as you'd expect:
for (let i = 0; i < doc.list.length; i++) doc.list[i] *= 2
// now doc.list is [0, 2, 4, 6.283185307179586]
doc.list.splice(2, 2, 'automerge')
// now doc.list is [0, 'hello', 'automerge', 4]
doc.list[4] = { key: 'value' } // objects can be nested inside lists as well
// Arrays in Automerge offer the convenience functions `insertAt` and `deleteAt`
doc.list.insertAt(1, 'hello', 'world') // inserts elements at given index
doc.list.deleteAt(5) // deletes element at given index
// now doc.list is [0, 'hello', 'world', 2, 4]

If you have previously worked with immutable state in JavaScript, you might be in the habit of using idioms like these:

state = Automerge.change(state, 'Add card', doc => {
const newItem = { id: 123, title: 'Rewrite everything in Rust', done: false } = {
ids: [,],
entities: {, []: newItem }

While this pattern works fine outside of Automerge, please don't do this in Automerge! Please use mutable idioms to update the state instead, like this:

state = Automerge.change(state, 'Add card', doc => {
const newItem = { id: 123, title: 'Rewrite everything in Rust', done: false }[] = newItem

Even though you are using mutating APIs, Automerge ensures that the code above does not actually mutate state, but returns a new copy of state in which the changes are reflected. The problem with the first example is that from Automerge's point of view, you are replacing the entire object (and everything inside it) with a brand new object. Thus, if two users concurrently update the document, Automerge will not be able to merge those changes (instead, you will just get a conflict on the property).

You can avoid this problem by making the changes at a fine-grained level: adding one item to the array of IDs with ids.push(, and adding one item to the map of entities with entities[] = newItem. This code works much better, since it tells Automerge exactly which changes you are making to the state, and this information allows Automerge to deal much better with concurrent updates by different users.

As a general principle with Automerge, you should make state updates at the most fine-grained level possible. Don't replace an entire object if you're only modifying one property of that object; just assign that one property instead.