№ | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3843 |
2 | jiangly | 3705 |
3 | Benq | 3628 |
4 | orzdevinwang | 3571 |
5 | Geothermal | 3569 |
5 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
7 | jqdai0815 | 3530 |
8 | ecnerwala | 3499 |
9 | gyh20 | 3447 |
10 | Rebelz | 3409 |
Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
№ | Пользователь | Вклад |
---|---|---|
1 | maomao90 | 171 |
2 | awoo | 164 |
3 | adamant | 162 |
4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
5 | nor | 153 |
5 | maroonrk | 153 |
7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
8 | Petr | 146 |
9 | orz | 145 |
10 | pajenegod | 144 |
Название |
---|
In 23-rd line you multiply ints up to 106. It will cause overflow. And be careful about number of digits in output.
I corrected the overflow situation but again I am getting segmentation fault. Could you please check it again? My new solution is here
You are running out of memory. Use vector instead of array with size 50k in line #99. Btw. it is not implemented optimally (complexity is with log^2 I think). I suggest you check out this algorithm with set. It is much simpler.
For example consider test where all points have the same x-coordinate. Then your program is . It can be fixed but it's nothing fun.
I fixed the size of that array to n everytime. Got accepted now. Thanks bro.
simpler way to find closest pair: link
Similar solution with O(N log N) time https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/closest-pair-of-points-onlogn-implementation/