# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
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 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
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 |
Name |
---|
It is unusual for modern contest problems to deal with numbers at the very end of
int32
orint64
range. Either the calculations are performed modulo 232 or 264, or they are limited by some numbers reasonably far from the bounds.My speculation is that the contribution score you got shows how much people dislike the idea of dealing with such edge cases. The reason is that most problem authors and contestants want to deal with higher level algorithmic ideas more than with lower level technical stuff.
Personally, I quite liked the tests you have shown in the comments, but only when reading for the second time. The first knee-jerk reaction was "meh, so what? people won't use this code for these numbers..."
(no, disregard this one)