I think this would be faster than sorting. Assuming sorting takes O(nlogn) time, and removal takes O(n) time, O(n) < O(nlogn), hence it would be more efficient. Since we shouldn't modify the original array we can make a copy.

good to know. compared to sorted?

I did it the exact same way, seems the more logit but not the fastest! Anyone has tips to improve your coding abilities for speed??

.remove() takes a lot of time.

Nicely done, we could further refactor by using min(numbers) directly in the return statement for second_min

Thank you. I was also looking for a one-liner for my solution.
I refreshed on pop() vs remove().

This is the most readable solution.
Much better than the top one.

Eh, I like this much really much.

i dont see that mentioned in the instructions! although I agree that original list should not be changed. But it's not written in instructions

You should 'nt touch the original Array/List

Wow that is very clever! I like it!