* Splitter.on(',').split("foo,,bar")} returns an iterable containing {@code ["foo", "", "bar"]}.
   *
   * @param separator the character to recognize as a separator
   * @return a splitter, with default settings, that recognizes that separator
   */
  public static Splitter on(char separator) {
    return on(CharMatcher.is(separator));
  }

  /**

   * Splitter.on(',').split("foo,,bar")} returns an iterable containing {@code ["foo", "", "bar"]}.
   *
   * @param separator the character to recognize as a separator
   * @return a splitter, with default settings, that recognizes that separator
   */
  public static Splitter on(char separator) {
    return on(CharMatcher.is(separator));
  }

  /**

  /**
   * Returns an immutable set containing each of {@code elements}, minus duplicates, in the order
   * each appears first in the source collection.
   *
   * <p><b>Performance note:</b> This method will sometimes recognize that the actual copy operation
   * is unnecessary; for example, {@code copyOf(copyOf(anArrayList))} will copy the data only once.
   * This reduces the expense of habitually making defensive copies at API boundaries. However, the

  /**
   * Returns an immutable set containing each of {@code elements}, minus duplicates, in the order
   * each appears first in the source collection.
   *
   * <p><b>Performance note:</b> This method will sometimes recognize that the actual copy operation
   * is unnecessary; for example, {@code copyOf(copyOf(anArrayList))} will copy the data only once.
   * This reduces the expense of habitually making defensive copies at API boundaries. However, the

         * safe, even though javac can't tell.
         *
         * Sun bug 6665356 is an additional complication. Until OpenJDK 7, javac
         * doesn't recognize this kind of cast as unchecked cast. Neither does
         * Eclipse 3.4. Right now, this suppression is mostly unnecessary.
         */
        @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")

         * safe, even though javac can't tell.
         *
         * Sun bug 6665356 is an additional complication. Until OpenJDK 7, javac
         * doesn't recognize this kind of cast as unchecked cast. Neither does
         * Eclipse 3.4. Right now, this suppression is mostly unnecessary.
         */
        @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")

        /*
         * We'd like to simply create our own TypeVariable with the newly resolved bounds. There's
         * just one problem: Starting with JDK 7u51, the JDK TypeVariable's equals() method doesn't
         * recognize instances of our TypeVariable implementation. This is a problem because users
         * compare TypeVariables from the JDK against TypeVariables returned by TypeResolver. To

 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>Implementations can be generally assumed to prioritize memory efficiency, then speed of
 *       access, and lastly speed of creation.
 *   <li>The {@code copyOf} methods will sometimes recognize that the actual copy operation is
 *       unnecessary; for example, {@code copyOf(copyOf(anArrayList))} should copy the data only
 *       once. This reduces the expense of habitually making defensive copies at API boundaries.

 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>Implementations can be generally assumed to prioritize memory efficiency, then speed of
 *       access, and lastly speed of creation.
 *   <li>The {@code copyOf} methods will sometimes recognize that the actual copy operation is
 *       unnecessary; for example, {@code copyOf(copyOf(anArrayList))} should copy the data only
 *       once. This reduces the expense of habitually making defensive copies at API boundaries.

     * can do magic to mock static method calls still can't do so for a system
     * class, so we need the indirection. In production, Hotspot should still
     * recognize that the call is 1-morphic and should still be willing to
     * inline it if necessary.
     */
    int identityHashCode(Object object) {
      return System.identityHashCode(object);
    }
  }