| № | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | tourist | 4009 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3823 |
| 3 | Benq | 3738 |
| 4 | Radewoosh | 3633 |
| 5 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
| 6 | orzdevinwang | 3529 |
| 7 | ecnerwala | 3446 |
| 8 | Um_nik | 3396 |
| 9 | ksun48 | 3390 |
| 10 | gamegame | 3386 |
| Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
| № | Пользователь | Вклад |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | cry | 167 |
| 2 | Um_nik | 163 |
| 3 | maomao90 | 162 |
| 3 | atcoder_official | 162 |
| 5 | adamant | 159 |
| 6 | -is-this-fft- | 158 |
| 7 | awoo | 157 |
| 8 | TheScrasse | 154 |
| 9 | Dominater069 | 153 |
| 9 | nor | 153 |
I was trying to solve a problem here in codeforces,and I used "set". I wanted to search for a value so I used "lower_bound". I submitted and I took TLE. After I changed a bit the source,and I used find() instead of lower_bound() and I passed all testcases. Why happens that? Is find() faster than lower_bound()??
Thank you !!!
Can u please post links to both the submission?
find() : http://codeforces.me/contest/527/submission/10646660
upper_bound(){sorry it is not lower_bound() :P, but here do the same work) : http://codeforces.me/contest/527/submission/10646608
try using left=width.upper_bound(val); instead of upper_bound(ALL(width),val);
This issue was already discussed on codeforces several times. The problem is that
upper_boundandlower_boundrequire random-access iterators. Only in that case they work in O(logN). If iterators are not random-access (like instd::set) these functions work in O(N) time. Usewidth.upper_bound(val)instead ofupper_bound(ALL(width),val)— it will work in O(logN) timeUse
myset.lowerbound(myset.begin(), myset.end())O(logn)instead
std::lowerbound(myset.begin(), myset.end())O(n)