}
        };

    final SimpleTearDown tearDownTwo = new SimpleTearDown(callback);
    stack.addTearDown(tearDownTwo);

    assertEquals(false, tearDownOne.ran);
    assertEquals(false, tearDownTwo.ran);

    stack.runTearDown();

    assertEquals("tearDownOne should have run", true, tearDownOne.ran);

          }
        };

    final SimpleTearDown tearDownTwo = new SimpleTearDown(callback);
    stack.addTearDown(tearDownTwo);

    assertEquals(false, tearDownOne.ran);
    assertEquals(false, tearDownTwo.ran);

    stack.runTearDown();

    assertEquals("tearDownOne should have run", true, tearDownOne.ran);

 * approach but with a subclass rather than a superclass.
 *
 * <p>TODO(cpovirk): Consider applying this subclass approach to our other types.
 *
 * <p>For {@code ImmutableMultiset} in particular, I ran into a problem with the {@code
 * GwtSerializationDependencies} approach: When autogenerating a serializer for the new class, GWT
 * tries to refer to our dummy serializer for the superclass,

          // If encoder underflows, it means either:
          // a) the final flush() succeeded; next drain (then done)
          // b) we encoded all of the input; next flush
          // c) we ran of out input to encode; next read more input
          if (doneEncoding) { // (a)
            doneFlushing = true;
            startDraining(false);
            continue DRAINING;
          } else if (endOfInput) { // (b)

 * approach but with a subclass rather than a superclass.
 *
 * <p>TODO(cpovirk): Consider applying this subclass approach to our other types.
 *
 * <p>For {@code ImmutableMultiset} in particular, I ran into a problem with the {@code
 * GwtSerializationDependencies} approach: When autogenerating a serializer for the new class, GWT
 * tries to refer to our dummy serializer for the superclass,