* Otherwise, at least reduce <i>explicit</i> dependencies on this type by using lambda expressions
 * or method references instead of classes, leaving your code easier to migrate in the future.
 *
 * <p>To use an existing supplier instance (say, named {@code supplier}) in a context where the
 * <i>other type</i> of supplier is expected, use the method reference {@code supplier::get}. A

   * invokeAny} which are pending serial execution, even the subset of the tasks that have not yet
   * started execution. It is unclear from the {@code ExecutorService} specification if these should
   * be included, and it's much easier to implement the interpretation that they not be. Finally, a
   * call to {@code shutdown} or {@code shutdownNow} may result in concurrent calls to {@code

    validations:
      required: true

  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        Comparing two approaches to a use case side by side can make it easier to examine the
        differences between them.


        Additionally, it's very useful to us if you can provide a "straw API" — what the

import javax.annotation.CheckForNull;
import org.checkerframework.checker.nullness.qual.Nullable;

/**
 * This class provides a skeletal implementation of the {@code Iterator} interface, to make this
 * interface easier to implement for certain types of data sources.
 *
 * <p>{@code Iterator} requires its implementations to support querying the end-of-data status

 * Futures#transform(ListenableFuture, com.google.common.base.Function, Executor) Futures.transform}
 * (or {@link FluentFuture#transform(com.google.common.base.Function, Executor)
 * FluentFuture.transform}), but you will often find it easier to use a framework. Frameworks
 * automate the process, often adding features like monitoring, debugging, and cancellation.
 * Examples of frameworks include:
 *
 * <ul>

   * per call to submit() or submitAsync(), and each instance supports only one call to execute().
   *
   * <p>This class would certainly be simpler and easier to reason about if it were built with
   * ThreadLocal; however, ThreadLocal is not well optimized for the case where the ThreadLocal is
   * non-static, and is initialized/removed frequently - this causes churn in the Thread specific

 * asynchronous operations. You can chain them together manually with calls to methods like {@link
 * Futures#transform(ListenableFuture, Function, Executor) Futures.transform}, but you will often
 * find it easier to use a framework. Frameworks automate the process, often adding features like
 * monitoring, debugging, and cancellation. Examples of frameworks include:
 *
 * <ul>

 * Otherwise, at least reduce <i>explicit</i> dependencies on this type by using lambda expressions
 * or method references instead of classes, leaving your code easier to migrate in the future.
 *
 * <p>See the Guava User Guide article on <a
 * href="https://github.com/google/guava/wiki/FunctionalExplained">the use of {@code Function}</a>.
 *
 * @author Kevin Bourrillion
 * @since 2.0

     * changing any bin. The operations must not take any action that could even momentarily 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

nx??2-h--nx??g&10aq0-ineve--nx?av?ev?lot?r&ajn&evvad?u??ájn&evvad?u????h?iz-lf--nx?j&ddadab?sel??k&el?hoj&sarak?šárák??iiv&ag&na&el?g??ŋ&ael?ág???ran???l&f?lahrevo?o&ms?s??sennev?t-&ilm--nx?tom--nx??u&-edr--nx?s??øms??muar?n&0-tsr--nx?2-dob--nx?5-&asir--nx?tals--nx??a&r!-i-om?f?t??t??douvsatvid?kiv?m&os?øs??n&od?ød??ra?sen?t&aouvatheig?ouv&a&c&ch&ab?áb??h&ab?áb???n??i&ag?ág??sa&mo?ttvid??án???z-rey--nx?ær&f?t???o&p-&ladr--nx?sens--nx??q-nagv--nx?r-asns--nx?s-kjks--nx?v-murb--nx?w-&anr&f--nx?t--n...