| № | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | tourist | 4009 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3823 |
| 3 | Benq | 3738 |
| 4 | Radewoosh | 3633 |
| 5 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
| 6 | orzdevinwang | 3529 |
| 7 | ecnerwala | 3446 |
| 8 | Um_nik | 3396 |
| 9 | ksun48 | 3390 |
| 10 | gamegame | 3386 |
| Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
| № | Пользователь | Вклад |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | cry | 167 |
| 2 | Um_nik | 163 |
| 3 | maomao90 | 162 |
| 3 | atcoder_official | 162 |
| 5 | adamant | 159 |
| 6 | -is-this-fft- | 158 |
| 7 | awoo | 157 |
| 8 | TheScrasse | 154 |
| 9 | Dominater069 | 153 |
| 9 | nor | 153 |
Look at these submissions:
They have one different that is using:
for(int c:vec)
instead of:
for(int j=0;j<vec.size();j++){
int c = vec[j];
...
}
one get Runtime and other one is Accepted.
I think that is happen because I change the size of my vector in the "for" However the size of it will be constant after each step.
Can I anyone explain? Tnks a lot.
I guess the first for stands for this:
for (auto it = v.begin(); it != v.end(); ++it)
Though, if it == v.end() — 1, you delete last element in vector and then make ++it, iterator will never become equal to v.end().
Changing the size may cause reallocation of memory for capacity increasing. As the result, iterators, that are used in range-based for loop, become invalid.
I'm not sure how vector iterators are realised in gcc, but theoretically they can handle it.
They are just a pointers, so they cant. Not only in gcc, but in VC++ and Clang too.