Why can't editorials be already prepared before the round even started?
Why can't editorials be already prepared before the round even started?
| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | tourist | 3690 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3647 |
| 3 | Benq | 3581 |
| 4 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
| 5 | Geothermal | 3569 |
| 5 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
| 7 | Radewoosh | 3509 |
| 8 | ecnerwala | 3486 |
| 9 | jqdai0815 | 3474 |
| 10 | gyh20 | 3447 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | maomao90 | 173 |
| 2 | awoo | 164 |
| 3 | adamant | 163 |
| 4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
| 5 | nor | 157 |
| 6 | maroonrk | 156 |
| 7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
| 8 | Petr | 146 |
| 8 | orz | 146 |
| 10 | pajenegod | 145 |
Because its not a blocker.....
And it should be.
I already complained (https://codeforces.com/blog/entry/97353) that it would be nice if it was not allowed to schedule a contest without editorial prepared (and preferably reviewed by coordinator)
It is incomprehensible to me that the current state of affairs is considered normal
because they're too busy maintaining the problems (making test datas, finding out unexpected solutions which should not pass) to even write one
You can just make everything before the contest starts?
yes but noone knows whether their problem would get nuked because a dupe has been found, or some other issue may happen... before they do
How does that have anything to do with editorials? The time for preparation is not limited.
because for the reasons stated above they simply DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO WRITE THE EDITORIALS
What about preparing the editorial beforehand and postponing the contest beginning by the same time?
nope, I did see some cases where the editorial is finished a week before the contest, but that's for the all-so-hopeful situation. AFAIK, most contests use most of their time for preparing problems to prove the solution, prove the proof's validity, call the testers and receive opinions, etc etc. and the schedule for all of this is usually very tight.
The problem I see with editorials is that they take an arbitrary amount of time and sometimes are very late. Having consistent editorial publishing times would be nice.
Having a position for the editorials writer is one way to fix this issue, but I don't know if the problemsetter/codeforces would be able to call/hire an editorials writer.
Sorry, but that is not how this works
In my experience, there are two types of problems in each contest:
1) easy problems, for which the editorial is not so long to write, because--
2) hard problems, for which writing an editorial is essential to have the problem itself in the contest, as the author himself and maybe kther testers assume some things about the problems. Putting sverything in a mathematical demonstration allows for others to just generally look and spot holes
Please do not repeat blogs. https://codeforces.com/blog/entry/80092
uh oh
It's funny how in thay blog the general vibe is "you fucking moron stop complaining" and here is "yeah, I guess you are right after all"
If you look at the upvotes, somehow yeah
But if you look at commentators it is more like "1 strongly agree, 1 mildly agree, 1 mildly disagree and 1 'you moron stop complaining'"
I agree. I believe formal proofs should be written even before the problem is set, since it prevents you from wasting effort on making problems with a wrong solution (aside from the participants complaining that the editorial is very late — in fact late editorials also reduce the overall educational value of the contest, since most participants that I know check the editorial in the hour after the contest). I have had such incidents when I was coordinating some uni contests, and also have heard of these happening in the context of Codeforces rounds where an author proposed a problem with a wrong solution, and that issue was missed by an IGM/LGM coordinator as well.
Not writing editorials before the contest makes it very easy to skip over this part. Sure, writing full editorials (with other approaches) can take more time, but editorials should have at least the author's solution ready before problem preparation/testing starts. I made sure of this whenever I coordinated my uni contests, and it helped a lot in smooth coordination (and minimized the wastage of authors' time), so I hope this is enforced in CF contests as well.
But if you will spend this time later anyway, there is no affect on the total time used whether you move it to before the round or not
I am not sure what you wanted to point out in your comment. My point was that writing a full editorial can take more time, so just write a preliminary editorial with the author's solution for each problem before proposing the contest. This will help in reducing errors (a formal proof will definitely make you realize if there are any issues), and you can always update the editorial after publishing it (which is done by a lot of authors), so it will help in retaining the educational value of the contest too. Yes, the total time remains the same, but you are using that time more efficiently, in case some issue crops up.
I missed that you were talking about "proposing" stage, so my comment was a bit out place. At proposing stage a complete editorial would be a waste of efforts as it may get rejected or whatever else might happen, I don't know.
My point was that before scheduling the actual contest you should have a full editorial, not a preliminary one because you will have to spend this time anyway but it will help to spot some problems before and allow publishing editorial immediately after the round
So probably the optimal situation is:
Draft of the editorial (aka preliminary) when proposing.
Complete editorial reviewed by coordinator/whoever else before scheduling the contest (or whatever it is called when it appears on the contests page for the users)
I think that's just a question of problemsetters' responsibility. When my buddies and I set rounds, they would get the editorial ready before the contest and publish it immediately after it finishes, and sometimes they would update it during the contest if they find a simpler solution in someone's submission. Perhaps we should've made tutorial availability a hard requirement for problemsetters, enforced by the coordinators? I foresee some problems with non-native Russian or English speakers, but perhaps coordinators would be able to help in this case.
Based. I'm a chug orz
Completely agree. Every round I've been involved with has always prepared editorials beforehand, and I don't see why every other round can't do the same, bar maybe difficulties in translation. I think the biggest culprit for super late editorials are Educational Rounds, I can't remember a single one within the last few months that came within 12 hours of the contest ending.
Edu's do have their excuses — It takes a remarkably long time from when open hack phase begins to when ratings update.
How is that an excuse for not preparing editorials lol? How does the editorial being published affect the open hacking stage?
I know it sounds weird, but the edu round as a whole technically does not end until the open hack phase does.
Doesn't make a difference. Discussion of the contest is allowed as soon as the official submission period is allowed, the hacking stage is an additional phase. It's just plain laziness to not prepare an editorial with the excuse that you must wait for the open hacking phase.
Besides, editorials for Div. 3 and Div. 4 rounds are always published before the hacking phase is over, usually within a few minutes of the submission period ending.
100% agree. For all of those who make excuses, atcoder usually has no problem with instant editorials. I think all problems with lack of time can be solved by scheduling the contest 1 day after all problems are prepared and the testing is over. 1 day is more than enough to prepare editorials for your own problems