MapDifference<Integer, String> original = Maps.difference(left, right);
    MapDifference<Integer, String> same = Maps.difference(left, right);
    MapDifference<Integer, String> reverse = Maps.difference(right, left);
    MapDifference<Integer, String> diff2 = Maps.difference(left, right2);

    new EqualsTester()
        .addEqualityGroup(original, same)

   *
   *  * Invalid percent-encoded sequences like `%xx` will be encoded like `%25xx`.
   *
   *  * Whitespace and control characters in the fragment will be stripped.
   *
   * These differences may have a significant consequence when the URI is interpreted by a
   * web server. For this reason the [URI class][URI] and this method should be avoided.
   */
  @JvmName("uri")
  fun toUri(): URI {

				maxUsedPct = pctUsed
			}
		}

		// Since we are comparing pools that may have a different number of sets
		// we multiply by the number of sets in the pool.
		// This will compensate for differences in set sizes
		// when choosing destination pool.
		// Different set sizes are already compensated by less disks.
		available *= uint64(nSets[i])

		serverPools[i] = poolAvailableSpace{
			Index:      i,

        long testTime = System.currentTimeMillis() - 3600000;
        file.setLastModified(testTime);

        long retrievedTime = file.lastModified();
        // Allow for reasonable precision differences
        assertTrue(Math.abs(retrievedTime - testTime) < 10000, "Set timestamp should be approximately correct");
    }

    // ========== Path and URL Operations ==========

    @Test

        return set1.contains(element) ^ set2.contains(element);
      }

      @Override
      int minSize() {
        int difference = minSize(set1) - maxSize(set2);
        return difference >= 0 ? difference : max(minSize(set2) - maxSize(set1), 0);
      }

      @Override
      int maxSize() {
        return saturatedAdd(maxSize(set1), maxSize(set2));
      }

        return set1.contains(element) ^ set2.contains(element);
      }

      @Override
      int minSize() {
        int difference = minSize(set1) - maxSize(set2);
        return difference >= 0 ? difference : max(minSize(set2) - maxSize(set1), 0);
      }

      @Override
      int maxSize() {
        return saturatedAdd(maxSize(set1), maxSize(set2));
      }

				bucketsToBeUpdated.Add(bucket)
				continue
			}
			if !globalDomainIPs.Intersection(set.CreateStringSet(getHostsSlice(r)...)).IsEmpty() {
				if globalDomainIPs.Difference(set.CreateStringSet(getHostsSlice(r)...)).IsEmpty() && !domainMissing {
					// No difference in terms of domainIPs and nothing
					// has changed so we don't change anything on the etcd.
					//
					// Additionally also check if domain is updated/missing with more

	policiesToUpdate := set.CreateStringSet(policies...)
	var newPolicySet set.StringSet
	newPolicyMapping := mp
	if isAttach {
		// new policies to attach => inputPolicies - existing (set difference)
		policiesToUpdate = policiesToUpdate.Difference(existingPolicySet)
		// validate that new policies to add are defined.
		for _, p := range policiesToUpdate.ToSlice() {
			if _, found := cache.iamPolicyDocsMap[p]; !found {

     * Another way to express this signature would be to bound <V> by @NonNull and accept
     * LF<? extends @Nullable V>. That might be better: There's currently no difference between the
     * outputs users get when calling this with <Foo> and calling it with <@Nullable Foo>. The only
     * difference is that calling it with <Foo> won't work when an input Future has a @Nullable
     * type. So why even make that error possible by giving callers the choice?

  TF_CHECK_OK(MessageToBuffer(node_in, buffer));
  TF_CHECK_OK(BufferToMessage(buffer, &node_out));
  TF_DeleteBuffer(buffer);

  protobuf::util::MessageDifferencer differencer;
  EXPECT_TRUE(differencer.Compare(node_in, node_out));
}

TEST(CAPI, TestTensorNonScalarBytesAllocateDelete) {
  const int batch_size = 4;
  const int num_dims = 2;
  int64_t* dims = new int64_t[num_dims];