| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | jiangly | 3810 |
| 2 | Benq | 3676 |
| 3 | Kevin114514 | 3655 |
| 4 | maroonrk | 3463 |
| 5 | strapple | 3447 |
| 6 | Um_nik | 3387 |
| 7 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 8 | turmax | 3317 |
| 9 | tourist | 3307 |
| 10 | jiangbowen | 3291 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 156 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 150 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 4 | Um_nik | 141 |
| 5 | Errichto | 139 |
| 6 | adamant | 137 |
| 7 | AmShZ | 135 |
| 8 | BledDest | 132 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 131 |
| 10 | qwexd | 129 |
Usually, topological sort is implemented like
void dfs(int x) {
vis[x] = true;
for(int u = 0; u < n; u++) {
if(!vis[u] && graph[x][u] == 1) {
dfs(u);
}
}
order.push_back(x);
}
And then printed in reverse order But if I implement this way
void dfs(int x) {
order.push_back(x);
vis[x] = true;
for(int u = 0; u < n; u++) {
if(!vis[u] && graph[x][u] == 1) {
dfs(u);
}
}
}
And print in same order.
Can someone provide me a test case where 2nd approach will fail
| Name |
|---|


