can"t benefit from incremental build acceleration, because on every
       execution it sees that the classpath has changed, and so to be
       safe, it needs to re-run.

       - This is unfortunate, because actually it would be safe to declare
       the task as up-to-date, because these two files, which are based on
       the generated index.xml, are outputs, not inputs. We can be sure of

   * trouble than just using Object.class.)
   *
   * Then we declare the getters for these fields as @GwtIncompatible so that no one can try to use
   * them under J2CL—or, as an unfortunate side effect, under GWT. We do still give the fields
   * themselves their proper values under GWT, since GWT's EnumMap does need the Class instance.
   *

#### Rationale

- SSE-C requires application to remember the keys for all GET/PUT operations, any unfortunate loss of keys would automatically mean the objects cannot be accessed anymore.
- SSE-C is hardly adopted by most widely used applications, applications prefer server to manage the keys via SSE-KMS or SSE-S3.

   * SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
   * Set<String> badStrings = (Set) Sets.intersection(
   *     aFewBadObjects, manyBadStrings);
   * }
   *
   * <p>This is unfortunate, but should come up only very rarely.
   */
  public static <E extends @Nullable Object> SetView<E> intersection(Set<E> set1, Set<?> set2) {
    checkNotNull(set1, "set1");
    checkNotNull(set2, "set2");

): Boolean =
  try {
    this.skipAll(timeout, timeUnit)
  } catch (_: IOException) {
    false
  }

/**
 * Returns true if new reads and writes should be attempted on this.
 *
 * Unfortunately Java's networking APIs don't offer a good health check, so we go on our own by
 * attempting to read with a short timeout. If the fails immediately we know the socket is
 * unhealthy.
 *

                                /* Apparently once a successfull NTLMSSP login occurs, the
                                 * server will return "Access denied" even if a logoff is
                                 * sent. Unfortunately calling disconnect() doesn't always
                                 * actually shutdown the connection before other threads
                                 * have committed themselves (e.g. InterruptTest example).

      if (newCount > array.length) {
        array = Arrays.copyOf(array, expandedCapacity(array.length, newCount));
      }
    }

    // Unfortunately this is pasted from ImmutableCollection.Builder.
    private static int expandedCapacity(int oldCapacity, int minCapacity) {
      if (minCapacity < 0) {

      if (newCount > array.length) {
        array = Arrays.copyOf(array, expandedCapacity(array.length, newCount));
      }
    }

    // Unfortunately this is pasted from ImmutableCollection.Builder.
    private static int expandedCapacity(int oldCapacity, int minCapacity) {
      if (minCapacity < 0) {

* Then **comment** saying that you did that, that's how I will know you really checked it.

/// info

Unfortunately, I can't simply trust PRs that just have several approvals.

         * another implementation but also forces AbstractFutureState to be able to do the
         * same—hence the try-catch here.
         *
         * (Really, we're fortunate that breaking AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater doesn't break _even
         * more_ things.)
         */
        helper = new SynchronizedHelper();
      }
    }
    ATOMIC_HELPER = helper;