→ Pay attention
→ Top rated
| # | 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 |
→ Top contributors
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 157 |
| 2 | adamant | 153 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 147 |
| 3 | Proof_by_QED | 147 |
| 5 | Dominater069 | 145 |
| 6 | errorgorn | 142 |
| 7 | cry | 139 |
| 8 | YuukiS | 135 |
| 9 | TheScrasse | 134 |
| 10 | chromate00 | 133 |
→ Find user
→ Recent actions
Codeforces (c) Copyright 2010-2026 Mike Mirzayanov
The only programming contests Web 2.0 platform
Server time: Apr/17/2026 08:17:59 (g2).
Desktop version, switch to mobile version.
Supported by
your unordered_map got an anti-hash test(unordered_map worst case look time O(n) due to all hashes colliding with each other). And because MS C++ 2017 is a different compiler, so unordered map hashing works a bit different. In whatever way, the three should get timelimit anyways. I recommend you not to use unordered_map in hackable contests or in sites that have system testing afterwards like codeforces.
At least it could have given TLE at the time of contest so i would have changed the unordered_map to map.
Sadly, authors usually don't usually think of anti-hashing tests but hackers do. Here is a really cool blog which helps if you want to use unordered_map.
But here all keys are ints and not int64_t/long longs, so their hashes do not (should not?) collide, so what's the real reason?
Numbers till $$$10^9$$$. At least not all hashes collide, but a lot of them. If numbers were only till $$$10^6$$$ or lower, I guess it was gonna pass.
Yeah, I did not realize that the hash function includes % bucket_count, thank you