}

  /** Equivalent to Arrays.copyOfRange(source, from, to, arrayOfType.getClass()). */
  /*
   * Arrays are a mess from a nullness perspective, and Class instances for object-array types are
   * even worse. For now, we just suppress and move on with our lives.
   *
   * - https://github.com/jspecify/jspecify/issues/65
   *
   * - https://github.com/jspecify/jdk/commit/71d826792b8c7ef95d492c50a274deab938f2552
   */
  /*

  }

  /** Equivalent to Arrays.copyOfRange(source, from, to, arrayOfType.getClass()). */
  /*
   * Arrays are a mess from a nullness perspective, and Class instances for object-array types are
   * even worse. For now, we just suppress and move on with our lives.
   *
   * - https://github.com/jspecify/jspecify/issues/65
   *
   * - https://github.com/jspecify/jdk/commit/71d826792b8c7ef95d492c50a274deab938f2552
   */
  /*

      /*
       * Assume that equals uses the == optimization when appropriate, and that
       * it would check hash codes as an optimization when appropriate. If we
       * did these things, it would just make things worse for the most
       * performance-conscious users.
       */
      if (key.equals(candidateKey)) {
        return entry.getValue();
      }
    }
    return null;
  }

  @Override

       * (We also haven't benchmarked under Android. We continue to use UnsafeAtomicHelper there so
       * that we don't change the performance there, for better or for worse.) Fortunately, JVM
       * users will typically use guava-jre, not guava-android, and guava-jre uses the VarHandle
       * implementation when possible.
       */
      try {

 *       method to obtain a correctly-sized copy.
 *   <li>The performance of using the associated {@code Builder} class can be assumed to be no
 *       worse, and possibly better, than creating a mutable collection and copying it.
 *   <li>Implementations generally do not cache hash codes. If your element or key type has a slow

 *       method to obtain a correctly-sized copy.
 *   <li>The performance of using the associated {@code Builder} class can be assumed to be no
 *       worse, and possibly better, than creating a mutable collection and copying it.
 *   <li>Implementations generally do not cache hash codes. If your element or key type has a slow

 * offering expected O(n + k log k) performance (worst case O(n log k)) for n calls to {@link
 * #offer} and a call to {@link #topK}, with O(k) memory. In comparison, quickselect has the same
 * asymptotics but requires O(n) memory, and a {@code PriorityQueue} implementation takes O(n log
 * k). In benchmarks, this implementation performs at least as well as either implementation, and
 * degrades more gracefully for worst-case input.
 *

  }

  @Override
  public boolean contains(@Nullable Object object) {
    if (object == null) {
      return false;
    }
    try {
      @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // The worst case is usually CCE, which we catch.
      C c = (C) object;
      return range.contains(c);
    } catch (ClassCastException e) {
      return false;
    }
  }

  @Override

    // Raising this number slows the worst-case contains behavior, speeds up hashFloodingDetected,
    // and reduces the false-positive probability.
    static final int MAX_RUN_MULTIPLIER = 13;

    /**
     * Checks the whole hash table for poor hash distribution. Takes O(n) in the worst case, O(n /
     * log n) on average.
     *

  }

  /**
   * Marks the given node as 'deleted' (null waiter) and then scans the list to unlink all deleted
   * nodes. This is an O(n) operation in the common case (and O(n^2) in the worst), but we are saved
   * by two things.
   *
   * <ul>
   *   <li>This is only called when a waiting thread times out or is interrupted. Both of which
   *       should be rare.