...
| # | 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 |
| Name |
|---|



Let, $$$n$$$ = no of nodes, $$$m$$$ = no of edges Finding all pair shortest path using belmenford takes $$$O(n^2m)$$$ but floyed warshal takes $$$O(n^3)$$$ time. floyed is very easy to write and code is short.
Floyd can be optimized to n^3/32
using bitset?
What do you mean by $$$O(V^3)$$$ is mostly more than $$$O(V^2E)$$$?
What if $$$E\gg V$$$?
Yes that why I said mostly and I think that bellman ford takes o((v-1)*v*e)
So then in these cases where $$$E\gg V$$$, the Floyd-Warshall will be much faster, so that's why it's useful
It's useful when E is much bigger than V