This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author vitaly
Recipients ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, gregory.p.smith, martin.panter, michael.foord, r.david.murray, rbcollins, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, vitaly
Date 2016-05-24.00:11:20
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1464048680.63.0.654407887084.issue27071@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
assertSequenceEqualUnordered is not a good fit, because it doesn't follow the de facto naming convention, whereby "Equal" should be the suffix.

Also assertSequenceEqualUnordered would be considered an oxymoron, since the word "Sequence" implies ordered, while "Unordered" is the opposite. It's like saying "ordered unordered collection".

My vote (if I had one) is still with assertUnorderedEqual. I think that from the word "Unordered" it's a reasonable leap that it refers to an unordered collection of elements, and it would be easy to remember.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-05-24 00:11:20vitalysetrecipients: + vitaly, georg.brandl, rhettinger, gregory.p.smith, rbcollins, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray, michael.foord, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka
2016-05-24 00:11:20vitalysetmessageid: <1464048680.63.0.654407887084.issue27071@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-05-24 00:11:20vitalylinkissue27071 messages
2016-05-24 00:11:20vitalycreate