New name for assert_lits_equal ?

[PragTob]

equal implies full equality aka == which seems confusing (and was pointed out as a downside to introducing assertions into our code base).

Not sure what the best name for this is, I introduced a small wrapper called assert_lists_contain_same for now - it's probably not the best for now happy for other variants but I wonder ig this would be a change considered for the library itself?

Wrapper for reference, yes it's just a module for now not a macro:

      import Assertions, except: [assert_lists_equal: 2, assert_lists_equal: 3]
      import AssertionAdjustments

defmodule ssertionAdjustments do
  require Assertions

  def assert_lists_contain_same(list_a, list_b) do
    Assertions.assert_lists_equal(list_a, list_b)
  end

  def assert_lists_contain_same(list_a, list_b, comparison) do
    Assertions.assert_lists_equal(list_a, list_b, comparison)
  end
end

[devonestes]

Funny enough, when I think of two lists as "equal," I always think of the contents and not the order, which is why I think this bug comes up so often in so many tests for folks. I (and I think many others) think of == as saying "Make sure these two lists have the same things in them," but what == really says is "Make sure these two lists have the same things in them, and make sure the lists are in the same order," so in my mind == is something more than "equal."

That said, I can totally see how this name might be confusing to many others, though, even though it makes sense to me, so I'm happy to explore a name change here. How about assert_lists_equivalent? Looking at the definition for equivalent I like this third one of corresponding or virtually identical especially in effect or function, so that seems like a potentially good fit. My biggest issue there is that I can never remember how to spell it, but tab complete should make that not so much of a problem :wink:

[beligante]

Funny enough, when I think of two lists as "equal," I always think of the contents and not the order, which is why I think this bug comes up so often in so many tests for folks. I (and I think many others) think of == as saying "Make sure these two lists have the same things in them," but what == really says is "Make sure these two lists have the same things in them, and make sure the lists are in the same order," so in my mind == is something more than "equal."

That said, I can totally see how this name might be confusing to many others, though, even though it makes sense to me, so I'm happy to explore a name change here. How about assert_lists_equivalent? Looking at the definition for equivalent I like this third one of corresponding or virtually identical especially in effect or function, so that seems like a potentially good fit. My biggest issue there is that I can never remember how to spell it, but tab complete should make that not so much of a problem 😉

I share the same thoughts as you @devonestes . Giving my 2cents on the discussion you've raised, there is another possible solution for your naming where assert_lists_equal could also accept an option to ensure the order. Like this

Assertions.assert_lists_equal(list_a, list_b, ensure_order: true)

This way you could keep the name as it is, and for devs it's cleaner what the default behaviour is

[etehtsea]

Would assert_lists_equal_unordered be a viable option?