// It is possible due to races that we are currently in the expected state even though we
      // 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

      // It is possible due to races that we are currently in the expected state even though we
      // 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

       * doesn't need access to the futures again, so we can just pass `null`.
       *
       * TODO(b/112550045): Allocating a single, cheaper listener is (I think) only an optimization.
       * If we make some other optimizations, this one will no longer be necessary. The optimization
       * could actually hurt in some cases, as it forces us to keep all inputs in memory until the

  `Headers.of(String...)` with `headersOf(vararg String)`.

#### Extension Functions

We’ve migrated from static functions to extension functions where we think they fit.

| Java                                | Kotlin                          |
| :---------------------------------- | :------------------------------ |

   */
  // Note: 90% of the time we don't add type parameters or wildcards that serve only to "tweak" the
  // desired return type. However, *nested* generics introduce a special class of problems that we
  // think tip it over into being worthwhile.
  public static <T extends @Nullable Object, S extends T> Comparator<Iterable<S>> lexicographical(
      Comparator<T> comparator) {

        return JAVA7.usedInGenericType(type);
      }

      /*
       * We use this only when getTypeName is available.
       *
       * Well, really, we use this when we think we're running under Java 8, as determined by some
       * logic in the static initializer, which does not check for getTypeName specifically. We

        // This may cause issues when an anonymous class is created inside a static initializer,
        // and the class's constructor's first parameter happens to be the enclosing class.
        // In such case, we may mistakenly think that the class is within a non-static context
        // and the first parameter is the hidden 'this'.
        return declaringClass.getEnclosingClass() != null
            && !Modifier.isStatic(declaringClass.getModifiers());

 *
 * @since 2.0
 */
@DoNotMock("Use ImmutableList.of or another implementation")
@GwtCompatible
@SuppressWarnings("serial") // we're overriding default serialization
// TODO(kevinb): I think we should push everything down to "BaseImmutableCollection" or something,
// just to do everything we can to emphasize the "practically an interface" nature of this class.

 *
 * @since 2.0
 */
@DoNotMock("Use ImmutableList.of or another implementation")
@GwtCompatible
@SuppressWarnings("serial") // we're overriding default serialization
// TODO(kevinb): I think we should push everything down to "BaseImmutableCollection" or something,
// just to do everything we can to emphasize the "practically an interface" nature of this class.

        return JAVA7.usedInGenericType(type);
      }

      /*
       * We use this only when getTypeName is available.
       *
       * Well, really, we use this when we think we're running under Java 8, as determined by some
       * logic in the static initializer, which does not check for getTypeName specifically. We