*
   * <p><b>{@code Stream} equivalent:</b> {@code stream.filter(predicate).findFirst()}.
   */
  public final Optional<@NonNull E> firstMatch(Predicate<? super E> predicate) {
    // Unsafe, but we can't do much about it now.
    return Iterables.<@NonNull E>tryFind((Iterable<@NonNull E>) getDelegate(), predicate);
  }

  /**
   * Returns a fluent iterable that applies {@code function} to each element of this fluent

   *
   * <p><b>{@code Stream} equivalent:</b> {@code stream.filter(predicate).findFirst()}.
   */
  public final Optional<@NonNull E> firstMatch(Predicate<? super E> predicate) {
    // Unsafe, but we can't do much about it now.
    return Iterables.<@NonNull E>tryFind((Iterable<@NonNull E>) getDelegate(), predicate);
  }

  /**
   * Returns a fluent iterable that applies {@code function} to each element of this fluent

labels.facet_filetype_pdf=PDF
labels.facet_filetype_fb2=FictionBook
labels.facet_filetype_epub=EPUB
labels.facet_filetype_ibooks=iBooks
labels.facet_filetype_txt=Text
labels.facet_filetype_rtf=Rich Text
labels.facet_filetype_chm=Kompilierte HTML-Hilfe
labels.facet_filetype_zip=ZIP-Archiv
labels.facet_filetype_7z=7z-Archiv
labels.facet_filetype_bz=BZIP-Archiv
labels.facet_filetype_bz2=BZIP2-Archiv

 *       does it offer a way to batch multiple events from a single producer together.
 *   <li>It doesn't support backpressure and other features needed for resilience.
 *   <li>It doesn't provide much control of threading.
 *   <li>It doesn't offer much monitoring.
 *   <li>It doesn't propagate exceptions, so apps don't have a way to react to them.
 *   <li>It doesn't interoperate well with RxJava, coroutines, and other more commonly used

      // timed out. e.g. if we weren't event able to grab the lock within the timeout we would never
      // even check the guard. I don't think we care too much about this use case but it could lead
      // to a confusing error message.
      throw new TimeoutException("Timed out waiting for " + this + " to reach the RUNNING state.");
    }
  }

  @Override

      // timed out. e.g. if we weren't event able to grab the lock within the timeout we would never
      // even check the guard. I don't think we care too much about this use case but it could lead
      // to a confusing error message.
      throw new TimeoutException("Timed out waiting for " + this + " to reach the RUNNING state.");
    }
  }

  @Override

import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.NoSuchElementException;
import junit.framework.TestCase;

/**
 * Unit test for IteratorTester.
 *
 * @author Mick Killianey
 */
@GwtCompatible
@SuppressWarnings("serial") // No serialization is used in this test
public class IteratorTesterTest extends TestCase {

  public void testCanCatchDifferentLengthOfIteration() {

 *
 * <p>Unlike {@code java.util.HashSet}, iteration is only proportional to the actual {@code size()},
 * which is optimal, and <i>not</i> the size of the internal hashtable, which could be much larger
 * than {@code size()}. Furthermore, this structure only depends on a fixed number of arrays; {@code
 * add(x)} operations <i>do not</i> create objects for the garbage collector to deal with, and for

   * and use that list instead.
   */
  public List<Long> asList() {
    /*
     * Typically we cache this kind of thing, but much repeated use of this view is a performance
     * anti-pattern anyway. If we cache, then everyone pays a price in memory footprint even if
     * they never use this method.
     */
    return new AsList(this);
  }

   * ImmutableList.copyOf} and use that list instead.
   */
  public List<Integer> asList() {
    /*
     * Typically we cache this kind of thing, but much repeated use of this view is a performance
     * anti-pattern anyway. If we cache, then everyone pays a price in memory footprint even if
     * they never use this method.
     */
    return new AsList(this);
  }