/**
   * Verifies that a collection is immutable.
   *
   * <p>A collection is considered immutable if:
   *
   * <ol>
   *   <li>All its mutation methods result in UnsupportedOperationException, and do not change the
   *       underlying contents.
   *   <li>All methods that return objects that can indirectly mutate the collection throw
   *       UnsupportedOperationException when those mutators are called.
   * </ol>
   *

      Collection<Integer> indexes, int scale, double[] dataset);

  static double getMinValue(double[] array, int from) {
    // This is basically a copy of com.google.math.Rank#getMinValue, with a small change in the
    // method signature: we always search to the end of the array.
    int min = from;
    for (int i = from + 1; i < array.length; i++) {
      if (array[min] > array[i]) {
        min = i;
      }

      Collection<Integer> indexes, int scale, double[] dataset);

  static double getMinValue(double[] array, int from) {
    // This is basically a copy of com.google.math.Rank#getMinValue, with a small change in the
    // method signature: we always search to the end of the array.
    int min = from;
    for (int i = from + 1; i < array.length; i++) {
      if (array[min] > array[i]) {
        min = i;
      }

 * bad design, and it does not prevent anyone from using the declaration---and experience has shown
 * that they will. If the method breaks the encapsulation of its class, then its internal
 * representation will be hard to change. Instead, use <a
 * href="http://errorprone.info/bugpattern/RestrictedApi">RestrictedApiChecker</a>, which enforces
 * fine-grained visibility policies.
 *
 * @author Johannes Henkel
 */
@GwtCompatible

   * class to begin with but rather something returned from a static factory method whose declared
   * return type is plain FilenameFilter. If we made such a change, then the annotation we choose
   * here would have no significance to end users, who would be forced to conform to the signature
   * used in FilenameFilter.)
   */
  @Override

    assertThat(emptyNetwork.nodeOrder()).isEqualTo(ElementOrder.<String>natural());
  }

  /**
   * Tests that the ImmutableNetwork.Builder doesn't change when the creating NetworkBuilder
   * changes.
   */
  @Test
  @SuppressWarnings("CheckReturnValue")
  public void immutableNetworkBuilder_copiesNetworkBuilder() {
    NetworkBuilder<String, Object> networkBuilder =

    assertThat(emptyGraph.nodeOrder()).isEqualTo(ElementOrder.<String>natural());
  }

  /**
   * Tests that the ImmutableValueGraph.Builder doesn't change when the creating ValueGraphBuilder
   * changes.
   */
  @Test
  @SuppressWarnings("CheckReturnValue")
  public void immutableValueGraphBuilder_copiesGraphBuilder() {
    ValueGraphBuilder<String, Object> graphBuilder =

 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> The methods of {@code ForwardingDeque} forward <b>indiscriminately</b> to the
 * methods of the delegate. For example, overriding {@link #add} alone <b>will not</b> change the
 * behavior of {@link #offer} which can lead to unexpected behavior. In this case, you should
 * override {@code offer} as well.
 *

 *   <li>equalsImpl: which implementation of array equality to use
 * </ul>
 *
 * <p><b>Important note:</b> the primary goal of this benchmark is to ensure that varying {@code
 * whereToDiffer} produces no observable change in performance. We want to make sure that the array
 * equals implementation is *not* short-circuiting to prevent timing-based attacks. Being fast is
 * only a secondary goal.
 *
 * @author Kurt Alfred Kluever
 */

 *   <li>equalsImpl: which implementation of array equality to use
 * </ul>
 *
 * <p><b>Important note:</b> the primary goal of this benchmark is to ensure that varying {@code
 * whereToDiffer} produces no observable change in performance. We want to make sure that the array
 * equals implementation is *not* short-circuiting to prevent timing-based attacks. Being fast is
 * only a secondary goal.
 *
 * @author Kurt Alfred Kluever
 */