// number of items than number of online disks.
				inconsistent++
				continue
			}
			if meta.Erasure.Distribution[i] != meta.Erasure.Index {
				// Mismatch indexes with distribution order
				inconsistent++
			}
		}
	}

	erasureDistributionReliable := true
	if inconsistent > len(partsMetadata)/2 {
		// If there are too many inconsistent files, then we can't trust erasure.Distribution (most likely

	@echo "Verify healing with rewrite"
	@(env bash $(PWD)/buildscripts/rewrite-old-new.sh)

verify-healing-inconsistent-versions: install-race ## verify resolving inconsistent versions
	@echo "Verify resolving inconsistent versions build with race"
	@(env bash $(PWD)/buildscripts/resolve-right-versions.sh)

build-debugging:
	@(env bash $(PWD)/docs/debugging/build.sh)

    assertEquals(Country.class, bimap.valueType());
  }

  public void testIterationOrder() {
    // The enum orderings are alphabetical, leading to the bimap and its inverse
    // having inconsistent iteration orderings.
    Map<Currency, Country> map =
        ImmutableMap.of(
            Currency.DOLLAR, Country.CANADA,
            Currency.PESO, Country.CHILE,
            Currency.FRANC, Country.SWITZERLAND);

    table.put('b', 1, "bar");
    table.put('a', 2, "baz");
    validateTableCopies(table);
    // Even though rowKeySet, columnKeySet, and cellSet have the same
    // iteration ordering, row has an inconsistent ordering.
    assertThat(table.row('b').keySet()).containsExactly(1, 2).inOrder();
    assertThat(ImmutableTable.copyOf(table).row('b').keySet()).containsExactly(2, 1).inOrder();
  }

   * example, {@code [] < [1] < [1, 2] < [2] < [1 << 31]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(int[], int[])}.
   */
  public static Comparator<int[]> lexicographicalComparator() {
    return LexicographicalComparator.INSTANCE;
  }

   * example, {@code [] < [1] < [1, 2] < [2] < [1 << 31]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(int[], int[])}.
   */
  public static Comparator<int[]> lexicographicalComparator() {
    return LexicographicalComparator.INSTANCE;
  }

      assertThrows(
          NullPointerException.class, () -> builder.addAll((Iterable<String>) iterableWithNulls));
    }
  }

  /**
   * Verify thread safety by using a collection whose size() may be inconsistent with the actual
   * number of elements and whose elements may change over time.
   *
   * <p>This test might fail in GWT because the GWT emulations might count on the input collection

   * example, {@code [] < [1] < [1, 2] < [2]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(int[], int[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<int[]> lexicographicalComparator() {

 * detailed at {@link ImmutableCollection}.
 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> as with any sorted collection, you are strongly advised not to use a {@link
 * Comparator} or {@link Comparable} type whose comparison behavior is <i>inconsistent with
 * equals</i>. That is, {@code a.compareTo(b)} or {@code comparator.compare(a, b)} should equal zero
 * <i>if and only if</i> {@code a.equals(b)}. If this advice is not followed, the resulting

   * lesser. For example, {@code [] < [1.0] < [1.0, 2.0] < [2.0]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(double[],
   * double[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<double[]> lexicographicalComparator() {