static Class<?> getArrayClass(Class<?> componentType) {
    // TODO(user): This is not the most efficient way to handle generic
    // arrays, but is there another way to extract the array class in a
    // non-hacky way (i.e. using String value class names- "[L...")?
    return Array.newInstance(componentType, 0).getClass();
  }

  /*

  static Class<?> getArrayClass(Class<?> componentType) {
    // TODO(user): This is not the most efficient way to handle generic
    // arrays, but is there another way to extract the array class in a
    // non-hacky way (i.e. using String value class names- "[L...")?
    return Array.newInstance(componentType, 0).getClass();
  }

  /*

    <!--
    Some tests need reflective access to the internals of these packages. It is only the
    tests themselves and not the code being tested that needs that access, though there's no
    obvious way to ensure that.

    We could consider arranging things so that only the tests we know need this would get
    the add-opens. Right now that doesn't seem worth the effort, though.
    -->
    <test.add.opens>

    <!--
    Some tests need reflective access to the internals of these packages. It is only the
    tests themselves and not the code being tested that needs that access, though there's no
    obvious way to ensure that.

    We could consider arranging things so that only the tests we know need this would get
    the add-opens. Right now that doesn't seem worth the effort, though.
    -->
    <test.add.opens>

         * original, identical JDK TypeVariable. By doing so, we sidestep the problem entirely.
         *
         * 2b. If the resolved types are different from the original types, things are trickier. The
         * only way to get a TypeVariable instance for the resolved types is to create our own. The
         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We

         * original, identical JDK TypeVariable. By doing so, we sidestep the problem entirely.
         *
         * 2b. If the resolved types are different from the original types, things are trickier. The
         * only way to get a TypeVariable instance for the resolved types is to create our own. The
         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We

            The good news is that, despite ignoring errors here, GWT does fail if any errors affect
            classes that are actually used in the module under test.

            One way to eliminate the warnings is to make base.testModule include the not really
            necessary <inherits> lines for c.g.c.collect.testModule, etc. However, adding <inherits>

// of bytes in the combined first two elements, error).
// The complete result is equal to
// `bytes.Join(append(fullBuffers, finalFragment), nil)`, which has a
// length of `totalLen`. The result is structured in this way to allow callers
// to minimize allocations and copies.
func (b *Reader) collectFragments(delim byte) (fullBuffers [][]byte, finalFragment []byte, totalLen int, err error) {
	var frag []byte

				} else {
					err = errFileNotFound
				}
			}
		}
		// when we have insufficient read quorum and inconsistent metadata return
		// file not found, since we can't possibly have a way to recover this object
		// anyway.
		if v, ok := err.(InsufficientReadQuorum); ok && v.Type == RQInconsistentMeta {
			if opts.VersionID != "" {
				err = errFileVersionNotFound
			} else {
				err = errFileNotFound

		_, encrypted := crypto.IsEncrypted(fi.Metadata)
		compressed := fi.IsCompressed()
		switch {
		case compressed:
			// ... nothing changes for compressed stream.
			// if actualSize is -1 we have no known way to
			// determine what is the actualSize.
		case encrypted:
			decSize, err := sio.DecryptedSize(uint64(n))
			if err == nil {
				actualSize = int64(decSize)
			}
		default:
			actualSize = n
		}