before.assertRun();
    inBetween.assertRun();
    after.assertRun();
  }

  public void testListenLaterSetAsynchronouslyLaterDelegateFailed() {
    CountingRunnable before = new CountingRunnable();
    CountingRunnable inBetween = new CountingRunnable();
    CountingRunnable after = new CountingRunnable();

    future.addListener(before, directExecutor());

      }
    }

    /**
     * Continues executing tasks from {@link #queue} until it is empty.
     *
     * <p>The thread's interrupt bit is cleared before execution of each task.
     *
     * <p>If the Thread in use is interrupted before or during execution of the tasks in {@link
     * #queue}, the Executor will complete its tasks, and then restore the interruption. This means

      super("b", "a", "c", "d", "e");
    }

    // for testing SortedSet and SortedMap methods
    public static final String BEFORE_FIRST = "\0";
    public static final String BEFORE_FIRST_2 = "\0\0";
    public static final String MIN_ELEMENT = "a";
    public static final String AFTER_LAST = "z";
    public static final String AFTER_LAST_2 = "zz";
  }

      super("b", "a", "c", "d", "e");
    }

    // for testing SortedSet and SortedMap methods
    public static final String BEFORE_FIRST = "\0";
    public static final String BEFORE_FIRST_2 = "\0\0";
    public static final String MIN_ELEMENT = "a";
    public static final String AFTER_LAST = "z";
    public static final String AFTER_LAST_2 = "zz";
  }

    before.assertRun();
    inBetween.assertRun();
    after.assertRun();
  }

  public void testListenLaterSetAsynchronouslyLaterDelegateFailed() {
    CountingRunnable before = new CountingRunnable();
    CountingRunnable inBetween = new CountingRunnable();
    CountingRunnable after = new CountingRunnable();

    future.addListener(before, directExecutor());

   *
   * <p>On the other hand, if a signalled thread wakes up to discover that its guard is still not
   * satisfied, it does *not* need to call this method before returning to wait. This can only
   * happen due to spurious wakeup (ignorable) or another thread acquiring the lock before the
   * current thread can and returning the guard to the unsatisfied state. In the latter case the

    long newValue = random.nextInt(MAX_ADDEND);
    for (int i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; i++) {
      long before = map.get(key);
      long result = map.putIfAbsent(key, newValue);
      long after = map.get(key);
      assertEquals(before, result);
      assertEquals(before == 0 ? newValue : before, after);

      map.remove(key);
      before = map.get(key);
      result = map.putIfAbsent(key, newValue);
      after = map.get(key);

 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>Each lock adds (and removes) itself to/from a ThreadLocal Set of acquired locks when the
 *       Thread acquires its first hold (and releases its last remaining hold).
 *   <li>Before the lock is acquired, the lock is checked against the current set of acquired
 *       locks---to each of the acquired locks, an edge from the soon-to-be-acquired lock is either
 *       verified or created.

    }
    if (that == aboveAll()) {
      return -1;
    }
    int result = Range.compareOrThrow(endpoint, that.endpoint);
    if (result != 0) {
      return result;
    }
    // same value. below comes before above
    return Booleans.compare(this instanceof AboveValue, that instanceof AboveValue);
  }

  C endpoint() {
    return endpoint;
  }

  @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // catching CCE
  @Override

      if (!executed) {
        runnables = new RunnableExecutorPair(runnable, executor, runnables);
        return;
      }
    }
    // Execute the runnable immediately. Because of scheduling this may end up getting called before
    // some of the previously added runnables, but we're OK with that. If we want to change the
    // contract to guarantee ordering among runnables we'd have to modify the logic here to allow
    // it.