fixed sorting of evalFuncs when passed as kwargs

[marcomangano]

Purpose

The evalFuncs argument in evalFunctions() and evalFunctionsSens() is casted to a sorted list in several parts of baseclasses.AeroProblem and pyAdflow, except when the functions are passed as kwarg in pyADflow.evalFuncs() - see this line.
This creates issues when the evalFuncs kwarg is passed as a set in a multi-processor run. Python sets indeed do not preserve ordering within the iterable object, so when the function values are gathered from different procs in a for loop over the list index, the values of different functions will be mixed together.

This PR addresses this by casting the problematic list to a sorted list.

Expected time until merged

Not much, I do not think a test is necessary here.

Type of change

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (non-backwards-compatible fix or feature)
• Code style update (formatting, renaming)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no API changes)
• Documentation update
• Maintenance update
• Other (please describe)

Testing

Checklist

• I have run flake8 and black to make sure the Python code adheres to PEP-8 and is consistently formatted
• I have formatted the Fortran code with fprettify or C/C++ code with clang-format as applicable
• I have run unit and regression tests which pass locally with my changes
• I have added new tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added necessary documentation

[ewu63]

For reference, this is the same issue that has appeared before when we first ported things to py3. See for example mdolab/baseclasses#3 (one of my earliest PRs!)

I don't think this is the best approach though. I guess I never considered that the user would pass in a set, but if we are going to accept that, I would propose casting the input to a sorted list instead of what's in this PR. E.g. after line #1356

else:
    evalFuncs = sorted(list(evalFuncs))

which is the same approach taken in baseclasses and other repos.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #249 (1c2bfe1) into main (069ab31) will increase coverage by 12.45%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #249       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   28.84%   41.30%   +12.45%     
===========================================
  Files          13       13               
  Lines        3806     3806               
===========================================
+ Hits         1098     1572      +474     
+ Misses       2708     2234      -474     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
adflow/pyADflow.py	68.43% <100.00%> (+21.33%)	⬆️
adflow/MExt.py	97.36% <0.00%> (+18.42%)	⬆️

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[marcomangano]

For reference, this is the same issue that has appeared before when we first ported things to py3. See for example mdolab/baseclasses#3 (one of my earliest PRs!)

I don't think this is the best approach though. I guess I never considered that the user would pass in a set, but if we are going to accept that, I would propose casting the input to a sorted list instead of what's in this PR. E.g. after line #1356

else:
    evalFuncs = sorted(list(evalFuncs))

which is the same approach taken in baseclasses and other repos.

Nvm, we figured that sorted() already casts the set into a list. We could refactor the loop right above in a more compact way though.

[sseraj]

Nice work getting to the bottom of this