}

    // TODO let the scope handler deal with this
    private static boolean isCompilePathElement(final String scope) {
        return Artifact.SCOPE_COMPILE.equals(scope)
                || Artifact.SCOPE_PROVIDED.equals(scope)
                || Artifact.SCOPE_SYSTEM.equals(scope);
    }

    // TODO let the scope handler deal with this

      // It's a weird formula, but tests prove it works.
      int adjust = size() - 1;
      for (int i = 0; i < axes.size(); i++) {
        adjust *= 31;
        adjust = ~~adjust;
        // in GWT, we have to deal with integer overflow carefully
      }
      int hash = 1;
      for (Set<E> axis : axes) {
        hash = 31 * hash + (size() / axis.size() * axis.hashCode());

        hash = ~~hash;
      }

   *
   * if (guardExpression) {
   *    throw new BadException(badMsg(...));
   * }
   *
   * The alternative natural refactorings into void or Exception-returning methods are much slower.
   * This is a big deal - we're talking factors of 2-8 in microbenchmarks, not just 10-20%. (This is
   * a hotspot optimizer bug, which should be fixed, but that's a separate, big project).
   *

            //
            // We need an executor that will not block.
            // We can't use work stealing, as we are building a graph
            // and this could lead to cycles where a thread waits for
            // a task to finish, then execute another one which waits
            // for the initial task...
            // In order to work around that problem, we override the

      HashMap<Object, Object> map1,
      HashMap<Object, Object> map2)
      throws Exception {
    // Only start measuring table size after the first element inserted, to
    // deal with empty-map optimization.
    map1.put(0, null);

    int initialBuckets = bucketsOf(map1);

    for (int i = 1; i < size; i++) {
      map1.put(i, null);
    }

      HashMap<Object, Object> map1,
      HashMap<Object, Object> map2)
      throws Exception {
    // Only start measuring table size after the first element inserted, to
    // deal with empty-map optimization.
    map1.put(0, null);

    int initialBuckets = bucketsOf(map1);

    for (int i = 1; i < size; i++) {
      map1.put(i, null);
    }

ks?áks??loh&ar?år??n!.sg??o&m&a?å??psgolb,?s!.sg?efremmah?or?ør??terdi?á&baol?ggráv?lá&b?s??soum?veib???u&b!.sg?alk?e&dna?gnir?nner??les?ælk??dra&b?eb??g&nasrop?vi?ŋásrop??j&daehal&a?á??jedub?v&arekkhar?árekkhár???ksiouf?n&diaegadvoug?taed???v&irp?lesl&am?åm???y&b&essen?nart?sebel?tsev??o&d&ar?na!s??or??gavtsev?k&rajb?sa??lem?mrak?n&art?n&if?orb???r&a&mah?n?v??e&dni?t&so?ton??va??ul?yd??s&am?enner?gav?lrak?tivk??vrejks??ø&d&ar?na!s??ør??gåvtsev?k&rajb?sa??lem?mrak?n&art?n&if?ørb???r&e&dni?t&so?t...

   *
   * <p><b>Note:</b> The current implementation eagerly allocates storage for {@code size} elements.
   * As a consequence, passing values like {@code Integer.MAX_VALUE} can lead to {@link
   * OutOfMemoryError}.
   *
   * @param iterator the iterator to return a partitioned view of
   * @param size the desired size of each partition (the last may be smaller)

  }

  /**
   * Support removal operations when filtering a filtered multimap. Since a filtered multimap has
   * iterators that don't support remove, passing one to the FilteredEntryMultimap constructor would
   * lead to a multimap whose removal operations would fail. This method combines the predicates to
   * avoid that problem.
   */
  private static <K extends @Nullable Object, V extends @Nullable Object>