for _, ent := range b.entries {
			delete(b.entries, ent.Key)
		}
	}
	c.evictList.Init()
}

// Add adds a value to the cache. Returns true if an eviction occurred.
// Returns false if there was no eviction: the item was already in the cache,
// or the size was not exceeded.
func (c *LRU[K, V]) Add(key K, value V) (evicted bool) {
	c.mu.Lock()
	defer c.mu.Unlock()
	now := time.Now()

   * granularity. For example, access queues and write queues are kept per segment when they are
   * required by the selected eviction algorithm. As such, when writing unit tests it is not
   * uncommon to specify {@code concurrencyLevel(1)} in order to achieve more deterministic eviction
   * behavior.
   *
   * <p>Note that future implementations may abandon segment locking in favor of more advanced
   * concurrency controls.

    assertEquals("Map must be empty by now", 0, cache.size());
    assertEquals("Eviction notifications must be received", 10, removalListener.getCount());

    CacheTesting.expireEntries((LoadingCache<?, ?>) cache, EXPIRING_TIME, ticker);
    // ensure that no new notifications are sent
    assertEquals("Eviction notifications must be received", 10, removalListener.getCount());
  }

// to release associated resources.
//
// Returns:
//   - A Store instance implemented by lruStore, which internally uses an LRU cache with the specified size,
//     eviction callback, and TTL.
func New(size int, ttl time.Duration) Store {
	if size <= 0 {
		size = defaultMaxSize
	}

	if ttl <= 0 {
		ttl = defaultTTL
	}

	onEvicted := func(k string, v *Stmt) {

      Platform.get().logCloseableLeak(message, callReference.callStackTrace)

      references.removeAt(i)

      // If this was the last allocation, the connection is eligible for immediate eviction.
      if (references.isEmpty()) {
        connection.idleAtNs = now - keepAliveDurationNs
        return 0
      }
    }

    return references.size
  }

  /**

         * large that doing the lookup is noticeably slower than redoing the work would be.
         *
         * Ideally we'd have a real eviction policy, but until we see a problem in practice, I hope
         * that this will suffice. I have not even benchmarked with different size limits.
         */
        if (validClasses.size() > 1000) {

         * large that doing the lookup is noticeably slower than redoing the work would be.
         *
         * Ideally we'd have a real eviction policy, but until we see a problem in practice, I hope
         * that this will suffice. I have not even benchmarked with different size limits.
         */
        if (validClasses.size() > 1000) {

            urlSet.add("http://example" + i + ".com/robots.txt");
        }
        assertEquals(10000, urlSet.size());

        // Add one more should maintain size at 10000 (LRU eviction)
        urlSet.add("http://overflow.com/robots.txt");
        assertEquals(10000, urlSet.size());
        assertTrue(urlSet.contains("http://overflow.com/robots.txt"));

import java.util.List;
import java.util.Set;
import junit.framework.TestCase;
import org.jspecify.annotations.NullUnmarked;

/**
 * Tests relating to cache eviction: what does and doesn't count toward maximumSize, what happens
 * when maximumSize is reached, etc.
 *
 * @author mike nonemacher
 */
@NullUnmarked
public class CacheEvictionTest extends TestCase {

  @Nullable Equivalence<Object> keyEquivalence;

  /**
   * Constructs a new {@code MapMaker} instance with default settings, including strong keys, strong
   * values, and no automatic eviction of any kind.
   */
  public MapMaker() {}

  /**
   * Sets a custom {@code Equivalence} strategy for comparing keys.
   *