On 12/04/17 23:44, Ian Kelly wrote:
This might be okay since Timsort on an already-sorted list should be O(n). But there's not really any need to keep them sorted and I would just use "lowest = min(items, key=itemgetter(0))".
Sure (and this was my main worry). I had it in my head for some reason that min() would return the smallest key, not the object (and hence I wouldn't be able to know which sequence object to get the next value from - sorting means it's always at index 0).
But of course, min() returns the outer object containing the key so I don't need to sort them to know how to address the correct sequence object.
operator.itemgetter() probably helps a bit, too ;) I've done all that and it works. Thanks, E. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
