In this scenario of "fast food burgers with your crush", as there is a lot of waiting 🕙, it makes a lot more sense to have a concurrent system ⏸🔀⏯.

This is the case for most of the web applications.

Many, many users, but your server is waiting 🕙 for their not-so-good connection to send their requests.

And then waiting 🕙 again for the responses to come back.

    }

    /**
     * Gets the delay time in milliseconds for waiting for new URLs.
     *
     * @return the delay time in milliseconds for waiting for new URLs
     */
    public long getDelayMillisForWaitingNewUrl() {
        return delayMillisForWaitingNewUrl;
    }

    /**
     * Sets the delay time in milliseconds for waiting for new URLs.
     *

     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.

     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.

   *
   * @throws InterruptedException if interrupted while waiting
   */
  public void enterInterruptibly() throws InterruptedException {
    lock.lockInterruptibly();
  }

  /**
   * Enters this monitor. Blocks at most the given time, and may be interrupted.
   *
   * @return whether the monitor was entered
   * @throws InterruptedException if interrupted while waiting
   * @since 33.4.0 (but since 28.0 in the JRE flavor)

 * ordinary tests.
 *
 * <p>Failure of the expected event to occur within an implementation-defined "reasonable" time
 * period or an interrupt while waiting for the expected event will result in a {@link
 * RuntimeException}.
 *
 * <p>Here's an example that tests a {@code finalize} method:
 *
 * {@snippet :
 * final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);

     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.

     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.
     <span style="background-color:#007166"><font color="#D3D7CF"> INFO </font></span>  Waiting for application startup.

 * ordinary tests.
 *
 * <p>Failure of the expected event to occur within an implementation-defined "reasonable" time
 * period or an interrupt while waiting for the expected event will result in a {@link
 * RuntimeException}.
 *
 * <p>Here's an example that tests a {@code finalize} method:
 *
 * {@snippet :
 * final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);

   * protect ourselves from that we want to make sure that tasks don't spin too much waiting for the
   * interrupting thread to complete the protocol.
   */
  /*
   * This test hangs (or maybe is just *very* slow) under Android.
   *
   * TODO(b/218700094): Ideally, get this to pass under Android. Failing that, convince ourselves