sort(v.begin(),v.end(),greater ()); OR sort(v.rbegin(),v.rend()); OR sort(v.begin(),v.end()); reverse(v.begin(),v.end()); All these are the same
# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 4009 |
2 | jiangly | 3823 |
3 | Benq | 3738 |
4 | Radewoosh | 3633 |
5 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
6 | orzdevinwang | 3529 |
7 | ecnerwala | 3446 |
8 | Um_nik | 3396 |
9 | ksun48 | 3390 |
10 | gamegame | 3386 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 166 |
2 | maomao90 | 163 |
2 | Um_nik | 163 |
4 | atcoder_official | 161 |
5 | adamant | 159 |
6 | -is-this-fft- | 158 |
7 | awoo | 157 |
8 | TheScrasse | 154 |
9 | nor | 153 |
9 | Dominater069 | 153 |
sort(v.begin(),v.end(),greater ()); OR sort(v.rbegin(),v.rend()); OR sort(v.begin(),v.end()); reverse(v.begin(),v.end()); All these are the same
Name |
---|
Auto comment: topic has been updated by SHAHARIAR_ISLAM_SAKIB (previous revision, new revision, compare).
ok but i perfer sort(v.rbegin(), v.rend());
Auto comment: topic has been updated by SHAHARIAR_ISLAM_SAKIB (previous revision, new revision, compare).
seek help
They all have a time complexity
O(n log n)
, in the sorting process the first one uses thegreater<int>()
comparator to sort in descending order based on this criterion while the second one uses reverse iterators instead of the comparator. But the third one actually adds a small constant factor because of the reversing, making the time complexity combined ofO(n log n) + O(n)
which is stillO(n log n)
overall but makes the first and the second methods slightly more efficient than it