→ Pay attention
→ Streams
→ 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 |
| 4 | Proof_by_QED | 146 |
| 5 | Dominater069 | 145 |
| 6 | errorgorn | 141 |
| 7 | cry | 139 |
| 8 | YuukiS | 135 |
| 9 | TheScrasse | 134 |
| 10 | chromate00 | 133 |
→ Find user
→ Recent actions
Comments
|
0
I know I was asking if someone has a solution for this |
|
0
How would C change if the subsequences's indices didn't have to be in an arithmetic progression? |
Codeforces (c) Copyright 2010-2026 Mike Mirzayanov
The only programming contests Web 2.0 platform
Server time: Apr/19/2026 06:11:21 (f1).
Desktop version, switch to mobile version.
Supported by
