"Abhishek Tiwari" <tiwariabhishe...@gmail.com> wrote
*Ans. 1*
values, items = list(zip(*sorted(zip(values,items), reverse=True)))
Personally I find that just a bit too dense so I'd break it out to:
s = sorted(zip(values,items), reverse=True)
values = [v for v,i in s]
items = [i for v,i in s]
*Ans. 2*
new_values = sorted(values, reverse=True)
new_items = [items[x] for x in map(values.index,new_values)]
I prefer this to the one-liner but don't like the map inside the
comprehension.
But as the old Irish saying goes:
"If I was going there I wouldn't start from here!"
From a purely readability point of view, and if I had any control
over the data formats I'd personally convert it to a dictionary of
value,item pairs and not bother with two lists. Sorting then
becomes a unified operation.
--
Alan Gauld
Author of the Learn to Program web site
http://www.alan-g.me.uk/
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
