| # | 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 | 136 |
| 8 | BledDest | 132 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 131 |
| 10 | qwexd | 129 |
|
0
I just spent quite a while debugging my solution to C, which I was confident was correct but failed on test 5 due to a runtime error. It turns out that it was a stack overflow error, and after I increased the stack size, my solution passed (original, with increased stack size). I feel that I should have gotten credit for my original solution during the contest since it would have passed within the given time and memory constraints and only failed due to a restriction in the judging environment. |
| Name |
|---|


