I solved this problem using both sorting and a set; but the sorting solution passes but the set solution TLEs. I'm curious if this is by design since the problem is marked under "sorting" or if hashing is just that much slower in this case.
# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3880 |
2 | jiangly | 3669 |
3 | ecnerwala | 3654 |
4 | Benq | 3627 |
5 | orzdevinwang | 3612 |
6 | Geothermal | 3569 |
6 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
8 | jqdai0815 | 3532 |
9 | Radewoosh | 3522 |
10 | gyh20 | 3447 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | awoo | 161 |
2 | maomao90 | 160 |
3 | adamant | 156 |
4 | maroonrk | 153 |
5 | atcoder_official | 148 |
5 | -is-this-fft- | 148 |
5 | SecondThread | 148 |
8 | Petr | 147 |
9 | nor | 144 |
10 | TheScrasse | 142 |
I solved this problem using both sorting and a set; but the sorting solution passes but the set solution TLEs. I'm curious if this is by design since the problem is marked under "sorting" or if hashing is just that much slower in this case.
Name |
---|
https://cses.fi/paste/6b9842c9b46ce28d778f8d/
add elements to the set and print size of a set, since you can't have duplicates in the set. (I don't know python so code is probably bad, but it works)
I would assume your solution using
set
only failed on test 13, which is an anti-hash-test designed specifically to make python'sset
TLE. You can read more about it here (general info about anti-hash-table hacks and details related to c++) and here (details related to python).yea, failed on test 13. Thanks