protected final BufferedReader reader;

    /** The line that has been read */
    protected String line = EMPTY;

    /**
     * Returns an {@link Iterable} that wraps a {@link LineIterator} for use in enhanced for-loops.
     *
     * @param reader
     *            The {@link Reader} to read strings from. Must not be {@literal null}.
     * @return An {@link Iterable} that wraps a {@link LineIterator}.
     */

   * self-loops twice (equivalently, the number of times an edge touches {@code node}).
   *
   * <p>For directed networks, this is equal to {@code inDegree(node) + outDegree(node)}.
   *
   * <p>For undirected networks, this is equal to {@code incidentEdges(node).size()} + (number of
   * self-loops incident to {@code node}).
   *

   * of edges in a graph arranged to form a path (a sequence of adjacent outgoing edges) starting
   * and ending with the same node.
   *
   * <p>This method will detect any non-empty cycle, including self-loops (a cycle of length 1).
   */
  public static <N> boolean hasCycle(Graph<N> graph) {
    int numEdges = graph.edges().size();
    if (numEdges == 0) {
      return false; // An edge-free graph is acyclic by definition.

   * of edges in a graph arranged to form a path (a sequence of adjacent outgoing edges) starting
   * and ending with the same node.
   *
   * <p>This method will detect any non-empty cycle, including self-loops (a cycle of length 1).
   */
  public static <N> boolean hasCycle(Graph<N> graph) {
    int numEdges = graph.edges().size();
    if (numEdges == 0) {
      return false; // An edge-free graph is acyclic by definition.

        .isEqualTo(0x1234567890abcdefL);
  }

  public void testParseLongWithRadixLimits() {
    BigInteger max = BigInteger.ZERO.setBit(64).subtract(ONE);
    // loops through all legal radix values.
    for (int r = Character.MIN_RADIX; r <= Character.MAX_RADIX; r++) {
      int radix = r;
      // tests can successfully parse a number string with this radix.

	}

	// Not necessarily needed but it ensures to the readers
	// eyes that we prefer a sorted setCount slice for the
	// subsequent function to figure out the right common
	// divisor, it avoids loops.
	slices.Sort(setCounts)

	return setCounts
}

// getSetIndexes returns list of indexes which provides the set size
// on each index, this function also determines the final set size

   *   <li>{@code ImmutableList.of(2, "C")}
   * </ul>
   *
   * <p>The result is guaranteed to be in the "traditional", lexicographical order for Cartesian
   * products that you would get from nesting for loops:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * for (B b0 : lists.get(0)) {
   *   for (B b1 : lists.get(1)) {
   *     ...
   *     ImmutableList<B> tuple = ImmutableList.of(b0, b1, ...);
   *     // operate on tuple
   *   }

   *   <li>{@code ImmutableList.of(2, "C")}
   * </ul>
   *
   * <p>The result is guaranteed to be in the "traditional", lexicographical order for Cartesian
   * products that you would get from nesting for loops:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * for (B b0 : sets.get(0)) {
   *   for (B b1 : sets.get(1)) {
   *     ...
   *     ImmutableList<B> tuple = ImmutableList.of(b0, b1, ...);
   *     // operate on tuple

In the rewritten program, the other goroutine can observe <code>2</code>, which was previously impossible.
</p>

<p>
Not introducing data races also means not assuming that loops terminate.
For example, a compiler must in general not move the accesses to <code>*p</code> or <code>*q</code>
ahead of the loop in this program:
</p>

<pre>
n := 0
for e := list; e != nil; e = e.next {

        scaling with distribution strategy and custom training loops. `AUTO`
        indicates that the reduction option will be determined by the usage
        context. For almost all cases this defaults to `SUM_OVER_BATCH_SIZE`.
        When used in distribution strategy scope, outside of built-in training
        loops such as `tf.keras` `compile` and `fit`, we expect reduction value