* annotated with LargeTest.
 *
 * <p>Why use a custom annotation instead of {@code android.test.suitebuilder.annotation.Suppress}?
 * I'm not completely sure that this is the right choice, but it has various advantages:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>An annotation named just "Suppress" might someday be treated by a non-Android tool as a
 *       suppression. This would follow the precedent of many of our annotation processors, which

      successor(pred(), succ());
      if (left == null) {
        return right;
      } else if (right == null) {
        return left;
      } else if (left.height >= right.height) {
        AvlNode<E> newTop = pred();
        // newTop is the maximum node in my left subtree
        newTop.left = left.removeMax(newTop);
        newTop.right = right;
        newTop.distinctElements = distinctElements - 1;

     * known-non-null type? But that particular problem might not arise here, since we're not
     * actually reading from the fields in any case in which they might be null (as proven by the
     * requireNonNull checks below). Plus, we're *already* lying here, since newHeader passes a null
     * key and value, which we pass to the superconstructor, even though the key and value type for

          accum = collector.combiner().apply(accum, newAccum);
        }
        return accum;
      }
    },
    /** Get one accumulator for each element and merge the accumulators right-to-left. */
    MERGE_RIGHT_ASSOCIATIVE {
      @Override
      final <T extends @Nullable Object, A extends @Nullable Object, R extends @Nullable Object>
          A result(Collector<T, A, R> collector, Iterable<T> inputs) {

      return asList(all).subList(2, elements.length + 2);
    }
  }

  private static Long[] concat(Long[] left, Long[] right) {
    Long[] result = new Long[left.length + right.length];
    System.arraycopy(left, 0, result, 0, left.length);
    System.arraycopy(right, 0, result, left.length, right.length);
    return result;
  }

  public abstract static class TestLongListGenerator implements TestListGenerator<Long> {

  //
  // 1. What about leaving/unlocking? Are you going to do
  //    guard.enter() paired with monitor.leave()? That might get
  //    confusing. It's nice for the finally block to look as close as
  //    possible to the thing right before the try. You could have
  //    guard.leave(), but that's a little odd as well because the
  //    guard doesn't have anything to do with leaving. You can't

      return new Ordering<Entry<String, Integer>>() {
        @Override
        public int compare(Entry<String, Integer> left, Entry<String, Integer> right) {
          return left.getKey().compareTo(right.getKey());
        }
      }.sortedCopy(insertionOrder);
    }

    @Override
    public List<Entry<String, Integer>> create(Object... elements) {

            "one", 1,
            "two", 2,
            "three", 3,
            "four", 4,
            "five", 5,
            "six", 6,
            "seven", 7,
            "eight", 8),
        "eight",
        8,
        "five",
        5,
        "four",
        4,
        "one",
        1,
        "seven",
        7,
        "six",
        6,
        "three",

    if (supportsRemove) {
      // We use a copy of "entryToRemove" in the assertion because "entryToRemove" might be
      // invalidated and have undefined behavior after entrySet.removeAll(entriesToRemove),
      // for example entryToRemove.getValue() might be null.
      Entry<K, V> entryToRemoveCopy =
          Helpers.mapEntry(entryToRemove.getKey(), entryToRemove.getValue());

    for (int i = 0; i < numInsertions * 2; i += 2) {
      bf.put(Integer.toString(i));
    }
    assertApproximateElementCountGuess(bf, numInsertions);

    // Assert that the BF "might" have all of the even numbers.
    for (int i = 0; i < numInsertions * 2; i += 2) {
      assertTrue(bf.mightContain(Integer.toString(i)));
    }