On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Token Type <typeto...@gmail.com> wrote: > yes, thanks all your tips. I did try sorted with itemgetter. However, the > sorted results are same as follows whether I set reverse=True or reverse= > False. Isn't it strange? Thanks.
First of all, "sorted" does not sort the list in place as you seem to be expecting. It returns a new sorted list. Since your code does not store the return value of the sorted call anywhere, the sorted list is discarded and only the original list is kept. If you want to sort a list in place, use the list.sort method instead. Second, you're not sorting the overall list. On each iteration your code: 1) assigns a new empty list to list_simi; 2) processes one of the pairs; 3) adds the pair to the empty list; and 4) sorts the list. On the next iteration you then start all over again with a new empty list, and so when you get to the sorting step you're only sorting one item each time. You need to accumulate the list instead of wiping it out on each iteration, and only sort it after the loop has completed. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
