* next} field is lazily initialized. The type of that field would be {@code @Nullable T}, and the
   * code would be responsible for populating a "real" {@code T} (which might still be the value
   * {@code null}!) before returning it to callers. Depending on how the code is structured, a
   * nullness analysis might not understand that the field has been populated. To avoid that problem

    suite.addTestSuite(MutableTypeToInstanceMapTest.class);

    suite.addTest(
        MapTestSuiteBuilder.using(
                new TestTypeToInstanceMapGenerator() {
                  // Other tests will verify what real, warning-free usage looks like
                  // but here we have to do some serious fudging
                  @Override
                  @SuppressWarnings({"unchecked", "rawtypes"})

   * than a one-character array containing the character itself. This enables the escaping algorithm
   * to perform more efficiently.
   *
   * <p>An escaper is expected to be able to deal with any {@code char} value, so this method should
   * not throw any exceptions.
   *
   * @param c the character to escape if necessary
   * @return the replacement characters, or {@code null} if no escaping was needed
   */

     * guaranteed to be either exact or one less than the correct value. This follows from fact that
     * floor(floor(x)/i) == floor(x/i) for any real x and integer i != 0. The proof is not quite
     * trivial.
     */
    long quotient = ((dividend >>> 1) / divisor) << 1;
    long rem = dividend - quotient * divisor;

         * This avoids out-of-control memory consumption, and it keeps the cache from growing so
         * large that doing the lookup is noticeably slower than redoing the work would be.
         *
         * Ideally we'd have a real eviction policy, but until we see a problem in practice, I hope
         * that this will suffice. I have not even benchmarked with different size limits.
         */
        if (validClasses.size() > 1000) {

    }

    // TODO let the scope handler deal with this
    private static boolean isCompilePathElement(final String scope) {
        return Artifact.SCOPE_COMPILE.equals(scope)
                || Artifact.SCOPE_PROVIDED.equals(scope)
                || Artifact.SCOPE_SYSTEM.equals(scope);
    }

    // TODO let the scope handler deal with this

   */
  public static Builder builder() {
    return new Builder();
  }

  /**
   * A builder for simple, fast escapers.
   *
   * <p>Typically an escaper needs to deal with the escaping of high valued characters or code
   * points. In these cases it is necessary to extend either {@link ArrayBasedCharEscaper} or {@link

    for (int i = 1; i < input.length(); i += 2) {
      int k1 = input.charAt(i - 1) | (input.charAt(i) << 16);
      k1 = mixK1(k1);
      h1 = mixH1(h1, k1);
    }

    // deal with any remaining characters
    if ((input.length() & 1) == 1) {
      int k1 = input.charAt(input.length() - 1);
      k1 = mixK1(k1);
      h1 ^= k1;
    }

    return fmix(h1, Chars.BYTES * input.length());

import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.Map.Entry;
import java.util.Set;
import junit.framework.TestCase;

/**
 * {@link LoadingCache} tests that deal with caches that actually contain some key-value mappings.
 *
 * @author mike nonemacher
 */

public class PopulatedCachesTest extends TestCase {

   * The problem with these is that remove(K, long) has to be done in two phases by definition ---
   * first decrementing to zero, and then removing. putIfAbsent or replace could observe the
   * intermediate zero-state. Ways we could deal with this are:
   *
   * - Don't define any of the ConcurrentMap operations. This is the current state of affairs.
   *
   * - Define putIfAbsent and replace as treating zero and absent identically (as currently