* that follows.
 *
 * b1
 * --
 *
 * This is either a mapping decision or the length of the mapped output, according to this table:
 *
 * ```
 *  0..63 : Length of the UTF-16 sequence that this range maps to. The offset is b2b3.
 * 64..79 : Offset by a fixed negative offset. The bottom 4 bits of b1 are the top 4 bits of the offset.

     * <pre>
     * a:1.0
     * b:1.0 -&gt; a:2.0
     * </pre>
     */
    @Test
    void testDepth() {
        ResolutionNode a1n = createResolutionNode(a1);
        ResolutionNode b1n = createResolutionNode(b1);
        ResolutionNode a2n = createResolutionNode(a2, b1n);

        assertResolveConflict(a1n, a1n, a2n);
    }

    /**
     * Tests that <code>a:1.0</code> wins in the scenario:
     * <pre>

    private static final String GROUP_ID = "test";

    // fields -----------------------------------------------------------------

    protected Artifact a1;

    protected Artifact a2;

    protected Artifact b1;

    private final String roleHint;

    @Inject
    private ArtifactFactory artifactFactory;

    private ConflictResolver conflictResolver;

    @Inject
    protected PlexusContainer container;

     * <pre>
     * a:1.0
     * b:1.0 -&gt; a:2.0
     * </pre>
     */
    @Test
    void testDepth() {
        ResolutionNode a1n = createResolutionNode(a1);
        ResolutionNode b1n = createResolutionNode(b1);
        ResolutionNode a2n = createResolutionNode(a2, b1n);

        assertResolveConflict(a2n, a1n, a2n);
    }

    /**
     * Tests that <code>a:2.0</code> wins in the scenario:
     * <pre>

     * <pre>
     * a:1.0
     * b:1.0 -&gt; a:2.0
     * </pre>
     */
    @Test
    void testDepth() {
        ResolutionNode a1n = createResolutionNode(a1);
        ResolutionNode b1n = createResolutionNode(b1);
        ResolutionNode a2n = createResolutionNode(a2, b1n);

        assertResolveConflict(a1n, a1n, a2n);
    }

    /**
     * Tests that <code>a:1.0</code> wins in the scenario:
     * <pre>

     * <pre>
     * a:1.0
     * b:1.0 -&gt; a:2.0
     * </pre>
     */
    @Test
    void testDepth() {
        ResolutionNode a1n = createResolutionNode(a1);
        ResolutionNode b1n = createResolutionNode(b1);
        ResolutionNode a2n = createResolutionNode(a2, b1n);

        assertResolveConflict(a2n, a1n, a2n);
    }

    /**
     * Tests that <code>a:2.0</code> wins in the scenario:
     * <pre>

        // TODO use newest conflict resolver
        ArtifactSpec a = createArtifactSpec("a", "1.0");
        ArtifactSpec b1 = a.addDependency("b", "1.0");
        ArtifactSpec c = a.addDependency("c", "1.0");
        ArtifactSpec d2 = b1.addDependency("d", "2.0");
        d2.addDependency("h", "1.0");
        ArtifactSpec d1 = c.addDependency("d", "1.0");

   * products that you would get from nesting for loops:
   *
   * <pre>{@code
   * for (B b0 : sets.get(0)) {
   *   for (B b1 : sets.get(1)) {
   *     ...
   *     ImmutableList<B> tuple = ImmutableList.of(b0, b1, ...);
   *     // operate on tuple
   *   }
   * }
   * }</pre>
   *

  @ParameterizedTest
  @ArgumentsSource(FileSystemParamProvider::class)
  fun iterator(parameters: Pair<FileSystem, Boolean>) {
    setUp(parameters.first, parameters.second)
    set("a", "a1", "a2")
    set("b", "b1", "b2")
    set("c", "c1", "c2")
    val iterator = cache.snapshots()
    assertThat(iterator.hasNext()).isTrue()
    iterator.next().use {
      assertThat(it.key()).isEqualTo("a")
      it.assertValue(0, "a1")

<pre>
type (
	A1 = string
	A2 = A1
)

type (
	B1 string
	B2 B1
	B3 []B1
	B4 B3
)
</pre>

<p>
The underlying type of <code>string</code>, <code>A1</code>, <code>A2</code>, <code>B1</code>,
and <code>B2</code> is <code>string</code>.
The underlying type of <code>[]B1</code>, <code>B3</code>, and <code>B4</code> is <code>[]B1</code>.
</p>

<h3 id="Method_sets">Method sets</h3>
<p>