You were right on. So I converted one of the mutable and it worked: (make-immutable-hash (hash->list mutable-hash))
Is there a better way? On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote: > Those are equal if they are both mutable or both immutable. Probably one > is mutable and the other isn't (this, unfortunately, doesn't show up in the > print outs). It is quite confusing, I agree. > > > (equal? #hash((6 . 1) (4 . 1) (3 . 2) (2 . 2)) #hash((2 . 2) (3 . 2) (4 > . 1) (6 . 1))) > #t > > Robby > > > > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 8:13 AM, J G Cho <g...@fundingmatters.com> wrote: > >> FAILURE >> actual: #hash((6 . 1) (4 . 1) (3 . 2) (2 . 2)) >> expected: #hash((2 . 2) (3 . 2) (4 . 1) (6 . 1)) >> name: check-equal? >> >> I tried alternative like >> (check-true (hash-equal? hash1 hash2)) >> >> but it turns out hash-equal? is not what I expected it to be. >> >> Other than writing a custom comparison, is there a handy way to compare 2 >> #hash? >> >> jGc >> >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users >> >> >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
