[issue40909] unittest assertCountEqual doesn't filter on values in dict
New submission from Emil Bode :
Found as a comment on SO
(https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12813633/how-to-assert-two-list-contain-the-same-elements-in-python#comment104082703_31832447):
In unittest, `self.assertCountEqual({1: [1, 2, 3]}, {1: [5, 6, 7]})` succeeds,
even though the two are different.
In this simple case, using assertCountEqual is unnecessary, but there may be
cases where a user wants to test for general equality regardless of order.
Note that `self.assertCountEqual([{1: [1, 2, 3]}], [{1: [5, 6, 7]}])` (where
both are a list, with only a dict-element), does fail.
And comparing 2 dicts with different keys also fails as expected.
--
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 370973
nosy: EmilBode
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: unittest assertCountEqual doesn't filter on values in dict
type: behavior
versions: Python 3.7
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue40909>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue38327] Creating set with empty string returns empty set
Emil Bode added the comment:
You're right, I tested with set('a'), which gave me a set of size one, but
generalized it here to 'somestring'.
Maybe I'm just too loose with using set, instead of {}
Sorry to bother you
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue38327>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue38327] Creating set with empty string returns empty set
Emil Bode added the comment: Some details about my setup: Python 3.7.1, Spyder 3.3.2 IPython 7.2.0 under Windows 10 64-bit -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue38327> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue38327] Creating set with empty string returns empty set
New submission from Emil Bode :
Initializing/creating a new set with an empty string via the set-command
returns an empty set instead of set with the empty string.
As in:
While set('somestring') gives me a set of size one,
set('') gives me an empty set (of size zero), just as set() would do
It is possible to create a set with an empty string, as the command {''} and
set(['']) work just as expected
--
messages: 353585
nosy: EmilBode
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Creating set with empty string returns empty set
type: behavior
versions: Python 3.7
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue38327>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
