}

  public void testExplicit_ordering_dupes() {
    SortedSet<String> set =
        ImmutableSortedSet.orderedBy(STRING_LENGTH)
            .add("in", "the", "quick", "brown", "fox", "jumped", "over", "a", "lazy", "dog")
            .build();
    assertThat(set).containsExactly("a", "in", "the", "over", "quick", "jumped").inOrder();
  }

  public void testExplicit_contains() {

  }

  public void testExplicit_ordering_dupes() {
    SortedSet<String> set =
        ImmutableSortedSet.orderedBy(STRING_LENGTH)
            .add("in", "the", "quick", "brown", "fox", "jumped", "over", "a", "lazy", "dog")
            .build();
    assertThat(set).containsExactly("a", "in", "the", "over", "quick", "jumped").inOrder();
  }

  public void testExplicit_contains() {

     * concurrent read operation to see inconsistent data. This is made easier by the nature of the
     * read operations in Map. For example, no operation can reveal that the table has grown but the
     * threshold has not yet been updated, so there are no atomicity requirements for this with
     * respect to reads.
     *

     * concurrent read operation to see inconsistent data. This is made easier by the nature of the
     * read operations in Map. For example, no operation can reveal that the table has grown but the
     * threshold has not yet been updated, so there are no atomicity requirements for this with
     * respect to reads.
     *

     * cause a concurrent read operation to see inconsistent data. This is made easier by the
     * nature of the read operations in Map. For example, no operation can reveal that the table
     * has grown but the threshold has not yet been updated, so there are no atomicity requirements
     * for this with respect to reads.
     *
     * As a guide, all critical volatile reads and writes to the count field are marked in code