Some Suggestions

[Moha]

At the beginning I am grateful for your efforts on this new system. The improvement of the old judge is a very good idea. I have some suggestions for the new judging interface.

1- Please add the author statistics as we had in uva before. in this way we can browse our solve/not solved problems easily.

2- Please add a flag to each problem for showing the status of the author submission on the problem (i.e. Solved/Not tried yet/WA/PE/RE..)

3- I think it is a good idea to have a e-mail confirmation and submission status as before.

3- The new Judge Status is so boring because it doesn't have any color. Use different colors for different results such as AC/PE..

4- If would be useful if we could see just our submission results after a new submission.

5- May be it would be more convenient to have the board in this new system.

[nymo]

Though I think these will be added in the future, it is worth mentioning here...

At Submission page>>
there should be the problem number, not only the problem name.
there should be a link to the problem statistics as before.

[Bappi_cuet]

>>There should be a common submission page like old system.

>>Also a option for vieving others statistics.

[RC's]

Yes. I agree with all of your suggestions.
Besides, I feel a difference using the old server and this new server.
I'm using C++ as my language and I didn't find any problem with submitting my code. But in the new server, they seek for
int main() for my code. I used to use void main() in my code instead of int main(). And I got several compilation error because of this.
So I suggest that the new compiler can cope with codes using void main().
Thanks.

[mf]

So I suggest that the new compiler can cope with codes using void main().

C++ standard requires that main() returns int, so the compiler's behaviour is perfectly OK.
It'd be better to just let users use the old g++ compiler as an option instead of fixing new one.

[Moha]

They have changed the compiler, and it will cause so many problem. Just consider if they want to rejudge some codes what will happen? most of them would get CE this time.

Nevertheless, I know gcc2.97 was too old and it was a god idea to utilize a new version of compiler but there should be the old compiler just for compatibility.

Another interesting thing which I have observed is the new judge system compile the submitted code in an Optimized mode(\O2). I don't know if the previous judge used this mode or not (as far as I know, there was no documentations about it) but I has some problems with using a plain the Optimized code. It happened when I wanted to create a new copy on an object via a simple copy-constructors, compiler didn't run the constructor for the new object but it shallow copy the old one into the new one. Of course this problem could be solved with -fno-elide-constructors. But the problem is can this compiler behavior happen for any of submitted source code?

[RC's]

@mf.
Maybe you're right, but the old compiler said it's OK even though I use void main(). And the compiler I use (MSVC) is also OK no matter what type of main() I use.
And for my previous posts it's OK when I used void main(). It's only error when I submitted to the new server. That's what I mean.
Of course I can start using int main() because of like what you say (C++ standard). But I'm afraid there are another users which use void main() instead of int main() like me and get frustrated because they get compilation errors. They should get AC for they code and actually they get CE for this.

And one thing I'm afraid of is all my submissions (except last one) used void main(). If they rejudge all of my submssions, I will only have 1 AC and others CE.. It is terrible..

[mf]

And one thing I'm afraid of is all my submissions (except last one) used void main(). If they rejudge all of my submssions, I will only have 1 AC and others CE.. It is terrible..

A lot of people unfortunately use void main(), and will be in a similar situation. And even just using the old compiler for them won't help - programs with void main() can terminate with a non-zero exit code, which is how the new judge detects runtime errors...

So I think it's safe to assume they'll fix all these things before rejudge, because many people are affected.

[tobby]

You know, my teacher taught us to use void main()..

[RC's]

Me too... In my university, I also taught to use void main() . And that's what I do. I think if I use int main(), I have to write 1 extra line (return 0; or something else), while using void I don't have to.

And it's very annoying to resubmit all of my codes. It will be very boring and time consuming, and also their server will have to spend more spaces on their harddisks. If there are a lot of people like me, then it will be a problem for the new server.

[mf]

You don't have to write 'return 0;' at the end of int main(). Compiler will do that automatically for you, without any warnings or errors. This is a feature of C++ :)

[Carlos]

my teacher taught me to write

PROGRAM helloworld
END PROGRAM helloworld

and I don't try to compile it under C++ (just joking:P)

Is any issue still to be answered? May I close the topic?

[Moha]

Is any issue still to be answered? May I close the topic?

The first post in this topic was made some suggestions. I don't know way this topic has been changed it course. It should have followed by some relevant posts. Anyway, I have another suggestion. Since most of us work with problem number instead of problem names, I think it is a good idea to add problem number(just like before) in the submission page and in the problem statement page. I really could help us to upload the correct code for each problem.

[Carlos]

no suggestions until we've released all features, sorry.