cpython/Lib/test/test_sort.py

292 lines
9.1 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

from test import test_support
import random
import sys
import unittest
verbose = test_support.verbose
nerrors = 0
def check(tag, expected, raw, compare=None):
global nerrors
if verbose:
print(" checking", tag)
orig = raw[:] # save input in case of error
if compare:
raw.sort(compare)
else:
raw.sort()
if len(expected) != len(raw):
print("error in", tag)
print("length mismatch;", len(expected), len(raw))
print(expected)
print(orig)
print(raw)
nerrors += 1
return
for i, good in enumerate(expected):
maybe = raw[i]
if good is not maybe:
print("error in", tag)
print("out of order at index", i, good, maybe)
print(expected)
print(orig)
print(raw)
nerrors += 1
return
class TestBase(unittest.TestCase):
def testStressfully(self):
# Try a variety of sizes at and around powers of 2, and at powers of 10.
sizes = [0]
for power in range(1, 10):
n = 2 ** power
sizes.extend(range(n-1, n+2))
sizes.extend([10, 100, 1000])
class Complains(object):
maybe_complain = True
def __init__(self, i):
self.i = i
def __lt__(self, other):
if Complains.maybe_complain and random.random() < 0.001:
if verbose:
print(" complaining at", self, other)
raise RuntimeError
return self.i < other.i
def __repr__(self):
return "Complains(%d)" % self.i
class Stable(object):
def __init__(self, key, i):
self.key = key
self.index = i
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
def __lt__(self, other):
return self.key < other.key
def __repr__(self):
return "Stable(%d, %d)" % (self.key, self.index)
for n in sizes:
x = range(n)
if verbose:
print("Testing size", n)
s = x[:]
check("identity", x, s)
s = x[:]
s.reverse()
check("reversed", x, s)
s = x[:]
random.shuffle(s)
check("random permutation", x, s)
y = x[:]
y.reverse()
s = x[:]
check("reversed via function", y, s, lambda a, b: cmp(b, a))
if verbose:
print(" Checking against an insane comparison function.")
print(" If the implementation isn't careful, this may segfault.")
s = x[:]
s.sort(lambda a, b: int(random.random() * 3) - 1)
check("an insane function left some permutation", x, s)
x = [Complains(i) for i in x]
s = x[:]
random.shuffle(s)
Complains.maybe_complain = True
it_complained = False
try:
s.sort()
except RuntimeError:
it_complained = True
if it_complained:
Complains.maybe_complain = False
check("exception during sort left some permutation", x, s)
s = [Stable(random.randrange(10), i) for i in xrange(n)]
augmented = [(e, e.index) for e in s]
augmented.sort() # forced stable because ties broken by index
x = [e for e, i in augmented] # a stable sort of s
check("stability", x, s)
#==============================================================================
class TestBugs(unittest.TestCase):
def test_bug453523(self):
# bug 453523 -- list.sort() crasher.
# If this fails, the most likely outcome is a core dump.
# Mutations during a list sort should raise a ValueError.
class C:
def __lt__(self, other):
if L and random.random() < 0.75:
L.pop()
else:
L.append(3)
return random.random() < 0.5
L = [C() for i in range(50)]
self.assertRaises(ValueError, L.sort)
def test_cmpNone(self):
# Testing None as a comparison function.
L = range(50)
random.shuffle(L)
L.sort(None)
self.assertEqual(L, range(50))
def test_undetected_mutation(self):
# Python 2.4a1 did not always detect mutation
memorywaster = []
for i in range(20):
def mutating_cmp(x, y):
L.append(3)
L.pop()
return cmp(x, y)
L = [1,2]
self.assertRaises(ValueError, L.sort, mutating_cmp)
def mutating_cmp(x, y):
L.append(3)
del L[:]
return cmp(x, y)
self.assertRaises(ValueError, L.sort, mutating_cmp)
memorywaster = [memorywaster]
#==============================================================================
class TestDecorateSortUndecorate(unittest.TestCase):
def test_decorated(self):
data = 'The quick Brown fox Jumped over The lazy Dog'.split()
copy = data[:]
random.shuffle(data)
data.sort(key=str.lower)
copy.sort(cmp=lambda x,y: cmp(x.lower(), y.lower()))
def test_baddecorator(self):
data = 'The quick Brown fox Jumped over The lazy Dog'.split()
self.assertRaises(TypeError, data.sort, None, lambda x,y: 0)
def test_stability(self):
data = [(random.randrange(100), i) for i in xrange(200)]
copy = data[:]
data.sort(key=lambda (x,y): x) # sort on the random first field
copy.sort() # sort using both fields
self.assertEqual(data, copy) # should get the same result
def test_cmp_and_key_combination(self):
# Verify that the wrapper has been removed
def compare(x, y):
self.assertEqual(type(x), str)
self.assertEqual(type(x), str)
return cmp(x, y)
data = 'The quick Brown fox Jumped over The lazy Dog'.split()
data.sort(cmp=compare, key=str.lower)
def test_badcmp_with_key(self):
# Verify that the wrapper has been removed
data = 'The quick Brown fox Jumped over The lazy Dog'.split()
self.assertRaises(TypeError, data.sort, "bad", str.lower)
def test_key_with_exception(self):
# Verify that the wrapper has been removed
data = range(-2,2)
dup = data[:]
self.assertRaises(ZeroDivisionError, data.sort, None, lambda x: 1/x)
self.assertEqual(data, dup)
def test_key_with_mutation(self):
data = range(10)
def k(x):
del data[:]
data[:] = range(20)
return x
self.assertRaises(ValueError, data.sort, key=k)
def test_key_with_mutating_del(self):
data = range(10)
class SortKiller(object):
def __init__(self, x):
pass
def __del__(self):
del data[:]
data[:] = range(20)
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
def __lt__(self, other):
return id(self) < id(other)
self.assertRaises(ValueError, data.sort, key=SortKiller)
def test_key_with_mutating_del_and_exception(self):
data = range(10)
## dup = data[:]
class SortKiller(object):
def __init__(self, x):
if x > 2:
raise RuntimeError
def __del__(self):
del data[:]
data[:] = range(20)
self.assertRaises(RuntimeError, data.sort, key=SortKiller)
## major honking subtlety: we *can't* do:
##
## self.assertEqual(data, dup)
##
## because there is a reference to a SortKiller in the
## traceback and by the time it dies we're outside the call to
## .sort() and so the list protection gimmicks are out of
## date (this cost some brain cells to figure out...).
def test_reverse(self):
data = range(100)
random.shuffle(data)
data.sort(reverse=True)
self.assertEqual(data, range(99,-1,-1))
2003-10-29 02:54:43 -04:00
self.assertRaises(TypeError, data.sort, "wrong type")
def test_reverse_stability(self):
data = [(random.randrange(100), i) for i in xrange(200)]
copy1 = data[:]
copy2 = data[:]
data.sort(cmp=lambda x,y: cmp(x[0],y[0]), reverse=True)
copy1.sort(cmp=lambda x,y: cmp(y[0],x[0]))
self.assertEqual(data, copy1)
copy2.sort(key=lambda x: x[0], reverse=True)
self.assertEqual(data, copy2)
#==============================================================================
def test_main(verbose=None):
test_classes = (
TestBase,
TestDecorateSortUndecorate,
TestBugs,
)
test_support.run_unittest(*test_classes)
# verify reference counting
if verbose and hasattr(sys, "gettotalrefcount"):
import gc
counts = [None] * 5
for i in xrange(len(counts)):
test_support.run_unittest(*test_classes)
gc.collect()
counts[i] = sys.gettotalrefcount()
print(counts)
if __name__ == "__main__":
test_main(verbose=True)