№ | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
---|---|---|
1 | jiangly | 3845 |
2 | tourist | 3798 |
3 | orzdevinwang | 3706 |
4 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
5 | ksun48 | 3589 |
6 | Ormlis | 3532 |
7 | Benq | 3468 |
8 | Radewoosh | 3463 |
9 | ecnerwala | 3451 |
10 | Um_nik | 3450 |
Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
№ | Пользователь | Вклад |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 165 |
2 | Qingyu | 160 |
3 | -is-this-fft- | 159 |
4 | atcoder_official | 157 |
5 | Dominater069 | 156 |
6 | adamant | 154 |
7 | djm03178 | 151 |
8 | luogu_official | 149 |
9 | awoo | 147 |
10 | TheScrasse | 145 |
Название |
---|
Arrays.sort() is not usually preferred to use since it uses quick sort whose worst case can go to O(n2).
Java 21 has fixed this issue and so its safe to use in Java 21. But in my experience i always avoid Arrays.sort instead i have merge sort implemented in my template which is always nlogn
understood thank you @chief_27
but using object type instead of primitive type also gave AC! 310873091