tests: use sorted(...) instead of .sort()

[Kakadus]

Pull Request check-list

• Do tests and lints pass with this change?
• Do the CI tests pass with this change (enable it first in your forked repo and wait for the github action build to finish)?
• Is the new or changed code fully tested?
• Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
• Is there an example added to the examples folder (if applicable)?

Description of change

While doing #167, I just copied existing tests for the valkey cluster. After reading the test code again, I noticed that the code compares

assert some_list.sort() == other_list.sort()

This is inherently flawed, as .sort() returns None. You can verify that with [0,1].sort() == [1,2].sort().

This PR uses sorted(...) instead which actually returns the sorted list as intended. I also fix one other occurrence of this I found using rg "sort\(\) =="

[bogdanp05]

nice catch!
lgtm

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.17%. Comparing base (cf12aae) to head (3bb7ba0).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
tests/test_asyncio/test_search.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #194      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.17%   76.17%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         130      130              
  Lines       33983    33983              
==========================================
- Hits        25888    25886       -2     
- Misses       8095     8097       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.