Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with time-limit-exceeded
Search options not deleted
user 182851
When the code scales so poorly in the face of large inputs that it cannot complete in a reasonable amount of time, use this instead of the [performance] tag.
6
votes
3
answers
43k
views
Minimum number of swaps required to sort the array in ascending order
Here is my problem statement. An excerpt:
You are given an unordered array consisting of consecutive integers ∈ [1, 2, 3, ..., n] without any duplicates. You are allowed to swap any two elements. You …
- 93