#### Utility: compare with alternatives


        There is always *some* alternative to adding a new feature to Guava, even if it's just
        forking Guava yourself.


        We want to see that new features have some significant advantage over the alternatives.
        These advantages can take

   * There is no need for a blocking lock; when the lock is not
   * available, threads try other slots (or the base).  During these
   * retries, there is increased contention and reduced locality,
   * which is still better than alternatives.
   *
   * Per-thread hash codes are initialized to random values.
   * Contention and/or table collisions are indicated by failed
   * CASes when performing an update operation (see method

 *   <li>It doesn't offer much monitoring.
 *   <li>It doesn't propagate exceptions, so apps don't have a way to react to them.
 *   <li>It doesn't interoperate well with RxJava, coroutines, and other more commonly used
 *       alternatives.
 *   <li>It imposes requirements on the lifecycle of its subscribers. For example, if an event
 *       occurs between when one subscriber is removed and the next subscriber is added, the event
 *       is dropped.

 * which will still appear when iterating over the table's contents in a foreach loop or a call to a
 * null-hostile method like {@link ImmutableTable#copyOf}. For alternatives, please see <a
 * href="https://github.com/google/guava/wiki/NewCollectionTypesExplained#table">the wiki</a>.
 *
 * <p>The allowed row and column keys must be supplied when the table is created. The table always

 *         .transform(User::getId, directExecutor())
 *         .transform(ActivityService::isLoggedIn, threadPool)
 *         .catching(RpcException.class, e -> false, directExecutor());
 * }
 *
 * <h3>Alternatives</h3>
 *
 * <h4>Frameworks</h4>
 *
 * <p>When chaining together a graph of asynchronous operations, you will often find it easier to

   *
   * <p>This is designed for generating persistent fingerprints of strings. It isn't
   * cryptographically secure, but it produces a high-quality hash with fewer collisions than some
   * alternatives we've used in the past.
   *
   * <p>FarmHash fingerprints are encoded by {@link HashCode#asBytes} in little-endian order. This
   * means {@link HashCode#asLong} is guaranteed to return the same value that

   *
   * <p>This is designed for generating persistent fingerprints of strings. It isn't
   * cryptographically secure, but it produces a high-quality hash with fewer collisions than some
   * alternatives we've used in the past.
   *
   * <p>FarmHash fingerprints are encoded by {@link HashCode#asBytes} in little-endian order. This
   * means {@link HashCode#asLong} is guaranteed to return the same value that

    val MIXED = "multipart/mixed".toMediaType()

    /**
     * The "multipart/alternative" type is syntactically identical to "multipart/mixed", but the
     * semantics are different. In particular, each of the body parts is an "alternative" version of
     * the same information.
     */
    @JvmField
    val ALTERNATIVE = "multipart/alternative".toMediaType()

    /**

 *    purpose of the certificate like "Entrust Root Certification Authority - G2" or
 *    "www.squareup.com".
 *
 *  * **A set of hostnames.** These are in the certificate's subject alternative name (SAN)
 *    extension. A subject alternative name is either a literal hostname (`squareup.com`), a literal
 *    IP address (`74.122.190.80`), or a hostname pattern (`*.api.squareup.com`).
 *

    // these checks test alternative subjects. The test data contains an
    // alternative subject starting with a japanese kanji character. This is
    // not supported by Android because the underlying implementation from
    // harmony follows the definition from rfc 1034 page 10 for alternative
    // subject names. This causes the code to drop all alternative subjects.