Order of includes changed in libsass 3.3

[saper]

I am getting this trying to test an update to #1040 (using sass/libsass@5b4122d):

  1) api .render({stats: {}}) should contain an array of all included files:

      Uncaught [ '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/index.scss',
  '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtur deepEqual [ '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/bar.scss',
  '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures
      + expected - actual

       [
      -  "/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/index.scss"
         "/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/bar.scss"
         "/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/foo.scss"
      +  "/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/index.scss"
       ]



  2) api .renderSync({stats: {}}) should contain an array of all included files:

      '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/index.scss' == '/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/bar.scss'
      + expected - actual

      -/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/index.scss
      +/home/saper/node_modules/node-sass/test/fixtures/include-files/bar.scss

Is the order now correct?

[xzyfer]

@saper I expect the new order is correct. This sounds like it's related to sass/libsass#1262

[saper]

so what are we testing here actually :)

[xzyfer]

My gut is the test was just based on the output Libsass produced assuming it was correct. Before my time :)

[saper]

Not my department, either :)

[xzyfer]

I'm not entirely sure either is correct to be honest.

[xzyfer]

includedFiles (Array) - Absolute paths to all related scss files in no particular order.

[saper]

includedFiles (Array) - Absolute paths to all related scss files in no particular order.

I'm relieved, thanks!

[saper]

Well, still valid - we need to fix the test to ignore the order.

[xzyfer]

I figured it all belonged in #1040

[saper]

poor me :) no problem

[saper]

Should be fixed in saper@160eb46