Guava has mostly not used the CONTRIBUTORS file, instead relying on Git
history. You can see a summary of contributions at
https://github.com/google/guava/graphs/contributors. However, Git history
over-counts some people's contributions because they were responsible for
mirroring out changes from our internal repo.

This files serves mainly to credit people who have not received proper credit
in the Git history.

Doug Lea, author of some concurrency libraries

[corporate CLA]: https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-corporate

## Building and Testing

The most reliable way to build and test Guava is:

```shell
./mvnw clean install
```

(Our benchmarks, however, are
[not set up to run easily externally][benchmarks-run].)

3.5. Application of Additional Terms

You may choose to offer, and to charge a fee for, warranty, support,
indemnity or liability obligations to one or more recipients of Covered
Software. However, You may do so only on Your own behalf, and not on
behalf of any Contributor. You must make it absolutely clear that any
such warranty, support, indemnity, or liability obligation is offered by

    assertThat(longIterator.hasNext()).isFalse();
  }

  public void testCopyOf_array_empty() {
    /*
     * We don't guarantee the same-as property, so we aren't obligated to test it. However, it's
     * useful in testing - when two things are the same then one can't have bugs the other doesn't.
     */
    assertThat(ImmutableLongArray.copyOf(new long[0])).isSameInstanceAs(ImmutableLongArray.of());
  }

   * is unnecessary; for example, {@code copyOf(copyOf(anArrayList))} will copy the data only once.
   * This reduces the expense of habitually making defensive copies at API boundaries. However, the
   * precise conditions for skipping the copy operation are undefined.
   *
   * @throws NullPointerException if any of {@code elements} is null
   * @since 7.0 (source-compatible since 2.0)
   */

   * implementation unless some of its bounds have changed in resolution. This avoids creating
   * unequal TypeVariable implementation unnecessarily. When the bounds do change, however, it's
   * fine for the synthetic TypeVariable to be unequal to any native TypeVariable anyway.
   */
  @SuppressWarnings("UnusedTypeParameter") // It's used reflectively.
  static final class NativeTypeVariableEquals<X> {

    return builder.toString();
  }

  /**
   * Returns an immutable array containing the same values as {@code this} array. This is logically
   * a no-op, and in some circumstances {@code this} itself is returned. However, if this instance
   * is a {@link #subArray} view of a larger array, this method will copy only the appropriate range
   * of values, resulting in an equivalent array with a smaller memory footprint.
   */

    return builder.toString();
  }

  /**
   * Returns an immutable array containing the same values as {@code this} array. This is logically
   * a no-op, and in some circumstances {@code this} itself is returned. However, if this instance
   * is a {@link #subArray} view of a larger array, this method will copy only the appropriate range
   * of values, resulting in an equivalent array with a smaller memory footprint.
   */

   *       to lead to trouble than an incompatible change would be.
   *   <li>We could make {@link #countMap} no longer be {@code final}. Then we could write to it
   *       directly during deserialization. However, we would lose Java's guarantees for {@code
   *       final} fields, including that their values are guaranteed to be visible even when an
   *       instance is unsafely published.
   * </ul>
   */

   * implementation unless some of its bounds have changed in resolution. This avoids creating
   * unequal TypeVariable implementation unnecessarily. When the bounds do change, however, it's
   * fine for the synthetic TypeVariable to be unequal to any native TypeVariable anyway.
   */
  @SuppressWarnings("UnusedTypeParameter") // It's used reflectively.
  static final class NativeTypeVariableEquals<X> {