Why my solution for this problem got TL?
Why my solution for this problem got TL?
| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3659 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3640 |
| 4 | turmax | 3450 |
| 5 | tourist | 3382 |
| 6 | strapple | 3360 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3354 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3348 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 3312 |
| 10 | idontwannadothis…e | 3191 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 155 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 151 |
| 3 | maspy | 149 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 145 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | BledDest | 136 |
| 8 | adamant | 134 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 132 |
| 10 | cry | 130 |
| Name |
|---|



i am getting TLE on the same test case . My soln : http://codeforces.me/contest/749/submission/23175411
It works O(N) on worst case, so in total it will be O(N * Q * log(N)).
I hear that complexity of lower_bound is O(n) for some cases.
It works O(N) on non-random-access iterators.
With my own binary search
It works O(size), that's why you got tle. Try using references.
Ty mate!!! Lost about day for searching mistake.