| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | tourist | 3985 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3814 |
| 3 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
| 4 | Benq | 3529 |
| 5 | orzdevinwang | 3526 |
| 6 | ksun48 | 3517 |
| 7 | Radewoosh | 3410 |
| 8 | hos.lyric | 3399 |
| 9 | ecnerwala | 3392 |
| 9 | Um_nik | 3392 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | cry | 169 |
| 2 | maomao90 | 162 |
| 2 | Um_nik | 162 |
| 4 | atcoder_official | 161 |
| 5 | djm03178 | 158 |
| 6 | -is-this-fft- | 157 |
| 7 | adamant | 155 |
| 8 | awoo | 154 |
| 8 | Dominater069 | 154 |
| 10 | luogu_official | 150 |
It seems it is able to generate wildly optimized binaries. So I wonder whether this is the reason it is not desirable here as it might optimize not so smart solutions so well that they squeeze into the time limit.
Interestingly timus supported Intel Compiler in the past.
I have been solving a problem today and I discovered that this code gets WA15 while this one gets AC. The only difference is in these lines
AC:
v<int> DP(10000); int MAX = -INF, ans = 0;
WA15:
int DP[10000], MAX = -INF, ans = 0;
Furthermore, compiled with G++0x both solutions get AC which means it is a bug or at least undefined behavior.
