| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3657 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3638 |
| 4 | turmax | 3442 |
| 5 | tourist | 3380 |
| 6 | Um_nik | 3353 |
| 7 | strapple | 3350 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3346 |
| 9 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 10 | maroonrk | 3310 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 158 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 150 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 144 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | adamant | 137 |
| 8 | BledDest | 135 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 133 |
| 10 | qwexd | 130 |
|
0
exactly how i did |
|
0
All you need is attention.For C,just dfs from en and output the index when backtracking.I found this after a long thought. |
|
0
I got it.The ordinary LCS cannot tell which string is substring and which is subsequence. |
|
0
So LCS is one of the wrong algorithms? |
|
0
(At first, I wanted to use 01trie to maintain the times a configuration appeared but I think it would get a ME too. |
|
0
For D I got the idea, but why if I use an unordered_map to keep track of how many time had a configuration appeared I will get a ME |
| Name |
|---|


