→ Pay attention
→ Top rated
| # | 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 |
→ Top contributors
| # | 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 |
→ Find user
→ Recent actions
Comments
|
0
I am writing to appeal the similarity warning issued for my submission (ID: 379410280) for problem 2237C. the code structure of the defining is similar but i have been using this structure over pretty long time in the contests and the approach of solving the problem through greedy stack merging approach is similar it is coincidence that we have common implementation to the problem |
Codeforces (c) Copyright 2010-2026 Mike Mirzayanov
The only programming contests Web 2.0 platform
Server time: Nov/06/2026 09:57:25 (h1).
Desktop version, switch to mobile version.
Supported by
