| № | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
| № | Пользователь | Вклад |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 157 |
| 2 | adamant | 153 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 147 |
| 4 | Proof_by_QED | 146 |
| 5 | Dominater069 | 145 |
| 6 | errorgorn | 142 |
| 7 | cry | 139 |
| 8 | YuukiS | 135 |
| 9 | TheScrasse | 134 |
| 10 | chromate00 | 133 |
Hi I am facing an issue in the problem 2036F - XORофикатор 3000 where I was getting WA when I am using long long But when I looked at the editorial the only major diff was using uint64_t instead and I got accepted
Can anyone explain why this is happening given below are the 2 codes
I guess uint64_t(that is, "u"int64_t) is actually unsigned long long instead of the signed one?
It is even failing for such small cases like "2 28 3 7"
I think I am missing something some property or something I have analysed it using debugs but not able to find where it is going wrong
Negative division is defined weirdly in C++, -1 / 2 = 0 and not -1