It seems to me that the right way to deal with this is to extend the
capabilities of the testing scheme so that it is able to handle sets,
not only lists.
-1
The testing scheme (the doctests part at least) is text-based. What
about
sage: tested_function() # random order
set([1, 5, 7, -3, 2,
On Jan 28, 2010, at 9:59 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
as discussed recently here in connection with GAP interface, the
following looks like an obvious deficiency of docstrings testing: a
computation returns a list in some unpredictable order, and docstrings
are in another order, even though the cor
as discussed recently here in connection with GAP interface, the
following looks like an obvious deficiency of docstrings testing: a
computation returns a list in some unpredictable order, and docstrings
are in another order, even though the corresponding sets are the same.
Just sorting the list i
