| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3792 |
| 2 | VivaciousAubergine | 3647 |
| 3 | Kevin114514 | 3603 |
| 4 | jiangly | 3583 |
| 5 | turmax | 3559 |
| 6 | tourist | 3541 |
| 7 | strapple | 3515 |
| 8 | ksun48 | 3461 |
| 9 | dXqwq | 3436 |
| 10 | Otomachi_Una | 3413 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 157 |
| 2 | adamant | 153 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 147 |
| 4 | Proof_by_QED | 146 |
| 5 | Dominater069 | 145 |
| 6 | errorgorn | 141 |
| 7 | cry | 139 |
| 8 | YuukiS | 135 |
| 9 | TheScrasse | 134 |
| 10 | chromate00 | 133 |
Usually, topological sort is implemented like
void dfs(int x) {
vis[x] = true;
for(int u = 0; u < n; u++) {
if(!vis[u] && graph[x][u] == 1) {
dfs(u);
}
}
order.push_back(x);
}
And then printed in reverse order But if I implement this way
void dfs(int x) {
order.push_back(x);
vis[x] = true;
for(int u = 0; u < n; u++) {
if(!vis[u] && graph[x][u] == 1) {
dfs(u);
}
}
}
And print in same order.
Can someone provide me a test case where 2nd approach will fail
| Name |
|---|


