.
| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3659 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3640 |
| 4 | turmax | 3450 |
| 5 | tourist | 3408 |
| 6 | strapple | 3360 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3354 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3348 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 3312 |
| 10 | idontwannadothis…e | 3191 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 154 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 151 |
| 3 | maspy | 149 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 146 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | BledDest | 136 |
| 8 | adamant | 135 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 133 |
| 10 | cry | 130 |
| Name |
|---|



This is definitely not a good idea for some constructive problems, where knowing the jury answer could allow participants to reverse-engineer the solution from the outputs. This is a bit less of an issue for problems with fixed answers, but something like that can still happen to a lesser degree.
Ari It can be taken care of , if we enable this checking only a limited number of times per each question, for example a maximum of 4 checks per question , I guess this clears it .
You can easily know you've misunderstood the problem when you receive WA verdict.
Yeah but in contests won't it be a -50 after passing pretest-1 only to fail in the next one
Don't turn Codeforces into HackerEarth.