.
| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3792 |
| 2 | VivaciousAubergine | 3647 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3631 |
| 4 | Kevin114514 | 3574 |
| 5 | maroonrk | 3521 |
| 6 | strapple | 3515 |
| 7 | Radewoosh | 3461 |
| 8 | tourist | 3428 |
| 9 | turmax | 3378 |
| 10 | Um_nik | 3376 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 162 |
| 2 | adamant | 148 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 146 |
| 4 | Dominater069 | 143 |
| 5 | errorgorn | 141 |
| 6 | cry | 138 |
| 7 | Proof_by_QED | 136 |
| 8 | YuukiS | 135 |
| 9 | chromate00 | 134 |
| 10 | soullless | 133 |
| Name |
|---|



This is definitely not a good idea for some constructive problems, where knowing the jury answer could allow participants to reverse-engineer the solution from the outputs. This is a bit less of an issue for problems with fixed answers, but something like that can still happen to a lesser degree.
Ari It can be taken care of , if we enable this checking only a limited number of times per each question, for example a maximum of 4 checks per question , I guess this clears it .
You can easily know you've misunderstood the problem when you receive WA verdict.
Yeah but in contests won't it be a -50 after passing pretest-1 only to fail in the next one
Don't turn Codeforces into HackerEarth.