assertTrue("Should acquire initial permit", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
    assertFalse("Should not acquire additional permit", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
    stopwatch.sleepMillis(5000);
    assertFalse(
        "Should not acquire additional permit even after sleeping", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
  }

  private long measureTotalTimeMillis(RateLimiter rateLimiter, int permits, Random random) {

    assertTrue("Should acquire initial permit", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
    assertFalse("Should not acquire additional permit", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
    stopwatch.sleepMillis(5000);
    assertFalse(
        "Should not acquire additional permit even after sleeping", rateLimiter.tryAcquire());
  }

  private long measureTotalTimeMillis(RateLimiter rateLimiter, int permits, Random random) {

 *       with the same key. Some behaviors of {@link Multimap} are left unspecified and are provided
 *       only by the subtypes mentioned below.
 *   <dt>{@link ListMultimap}
 *   <dd>An extension of {@link Multimap} which permits duplicate entries, supports random access of
 *       values for a particular key, and has <i>partially order-dependent equality</i> as defined

      if (orderedNodeConnections != null) {
        orderedNodeConnections.remove(new NodeConnection.Succ<>((N) node));
      }
    }

    /*
     * TODO(cpovirk): `return (V) removedValue` once our checker permits that.
     *
     * (We promoted a class of warnings into errors because sometimes they indicate real problems.
     * But now we need to "undo" some instance of spurious errors, as discussed in

    Permissions perms = new Permissions();

    AdjustablePolicy(Permission... permissions) {
      for (Permission permission : permissions) perms.add(permission);
    }

    void addPermission(Permission perm) {
      perms.add(perm);
    }

    void clearPermissions() {
      perms = new Permissions();
    }

    @Override

      assertFalse(
          "Inverse should not contain value " + reversed.getValue(),
          inv.containsValue(reversed.getValue()));
      /*
       * TODO(cpovirk): This is a bit stronger than super.expectMissing(), which permits a <key,
       * someOtherValue> pair.
       */
      assertNull(
          "Inverse should not return a mapping for key " + reversed.getKey(),
          inv.get(reversed.getKey()));
    }
  }

      assertFalse(
          "Inverse should not contain value " + reversed.getValue(),
          inv.containsValue(reversed.getValue()));
      /*
       * TODO(cpovirk): This is a bit stronger than super.expectMissing(), which permits a <key,
       * someOtherValue> pair.
       */
      assertNull(
          "Inverse should not return a mapping for key " + reversed.getKey(),
          inv.get(reversed.getKey()));
    }
  }

    Permissions perms = new Permissions();

    AdjustablePolicy(Permission... permissions) {
      for (Permission permission : permissions) perms.add(permission);
    }

    void addPermission(Permission perm) {
      perms.add(perm);
    }

    void clearPermissions() {
      perms = new Permissions();
    }

     * nullness annotations in ImmutableMap and those in its own Map type. In response, it considers
     * the parameter and return type both to be platform types. As a result, Kotlin permits calls
     * that can lead to NullPointerException. That's unfortunate. But hopefully most Kotlin callers
     * use `get(key) ?: defaultValue` instead of this method, anyway.
     */
    V result = get(key);

       * seen value. And while we *could* do that, we aren't required to: Map.Entry explicitly says
       * that behavior is undefined when the backing map is modified through another API. (It even
       * permits us to throw IllegalStateException. Maybe we should have done that, but we probably
       * shouldn't change now for fear of breaking people.)
       */
      return (lastKnownIndex == -1) ? unsafeNull() : value(lastKnownIndex);