uses: actions/checkout@v6

      - name: Install Old JDK 8
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:
          distribution: 'zulu'
          java-version: 8.0.242

      - name: Configure JDK
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:
          distribution: 'zulu'
          java-version: 11

      - name: Configure JDK
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:

              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.model=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.parser=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.processing=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.tree=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.util=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>

              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.model=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.parser=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.processing=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.tree=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>
              <arg>-J--add-exports=jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.util=ALL-UNNAMED</arg>

      call.execute()
    }.also { expected ->
      when (expected) {
        is SSLHandshakeException -> {
          // JDK 11+
        }
        is SSLException -> {
          // javax.net.ssl.SSLException: readRecord
        }
        is SocketException -> {
          // Conscrypt, JDK 8 (>= 292), JDK 9
        }
        else -> {
          assertThat(expected.message).isEqualTo("exhausted all routes")
        }

         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We
         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK

    } catch (IllegalArgumentException expected) {
      /*
       * The subList() docs claim that this should be an
       * IndexOutOfBoundsException, but many JDK implementations throw
       * IllegalArgumentException:
       * https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4506427
       */
    }
  }

  @SuppressWarnings("EmptyList") // ImmutableList doesn't support nullable element types
  public void testSubList_empty() {

    } catch (IllegalArgumentException expected) {
      /*
       * The subList() docs claim that this should be an
       * IndexOutOfBoundsException, but many JDK implementations throw
       * IllegalArgumentException:
       * https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4506427
       */
    }
  }

  @SuppressWarnings("EmptyList") // ImmutableList doesn't support nullable element types
  public void testSubList_empty() {

        }
    }

    /*
     * Prepare reflective access to ExtendedGSSContext. The reflective access
     * abstracts the access so far, that Oracle JDK, Open JDK and IBM JDK are
     * supported.
     *
     * At the time of the first implementation only a test on Oracle JDK was
     * done.
     */

    private static final String OPENJDK_JGSS_INQUIRE_TYPE_CLASS = "com.sun.security.jgss.InquireType";

         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We
         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK

import java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport;
import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable;

@GwtCompatible
@ReflectionSupport(value = ReflectionSupport.Level.FULL)
// Some Android 5.0.x Samsung devices have bugs in JDK reflection APIs that cause
// getDeclaredField to throw a NoSuchFieldException when the field is definitely there.
// Since this class only needs CAS on one field, we can avoid this bug by extending AtomicReference