* @throws UnsupportedCharsetException if a charset value is present, but no support is available
   *     in this instance of the Java virtual machine
   */
  public Optional<Charset> charset() {
    // racy single-check idiom, this is safe because Optional is immutable.
    Optional<Charset> local = parsedCharset;
    if (local == null) {
      String value = null;
      local = Optional.absent();

        thirdSignal.countDown();
        result.set(1, cache.getUnchecked(key));
        doneSignal.countDown();
      }
    }.start();

    // give the second get a chance to run; it is okay for this to be racy
    // as the end result should be the same either way
    thirdSignal.await();
    Thread.yield();

    // Expand!
    CacheTesting.forceExpandSegment(cache, key);

  @LazyInit
  @CheckForNull
  transient ImmutableSortedSet<E> descendingSet;

  /** @since 12.0 */
  @GwtIncompatible // NavigableSet
  @Override
  public ImmutableSortedSet<E> descendingSet() {
    // racy single-check idiom
    ImmutableSortedSet<E> result = descendingSet;
    if (result == null) {
      result = descendingSet = createDescendingSet();
      result.descendingSet = this;
    }
    return result;

  private volatile @Nullable Logger logger;

  LazyLogger(Class<?> ownerOfLogger) {
    this.loggerName = ownerOfLogger.getName();
  }

  Logger get() {
    /*
     * We use double-checked locking. We could the try racy single-check idiom, but that would
     * depend on Logger not contain mutable state.
     *
     * We could use Suppliers.memoizingSupplier here, but I micro-optimized to this implementation

  /**
   * Resets variables maintaining the sum to zero. This method may be a useful alternative to
   * creating a new adder, but is only effective if there are no concurrent updates. Because this
   * method is intrinsically racy, it should only be used when it is known that no threads are
   * concurrently updating.
   */
  public void reset() {
    internalReset(0L);
  }

  /**

  /**
   * Resets variables maintaining the sum to zero. This method may be a useful alternative to
   * creating a new adder, but is only effective if there are no concurrent updates. Because this
   * method is intrinsically racy, it should only be used when it is known that no threads are
   * concurrently updating.
   */
  public void reset() {
    internalReset(0L);
  }

  /**

     *       cleared, we know that we're not executing inline any more
     * </ul>
     *
     * All the states where thread != currentThread are identical for our purposes, and so even
     * though it's racy, we don't care which of those values we get, so no need to synchronize.
     */
    @CheckForNull @LazyInit Thread thread;

    /** Only used by the thread associated with this object */

        thirdSignal.countDown();
        result.set(1, cache.getUnchecked(key));
        doneSignal.countDown();
      }
    }.start();

    // give the second get a chance to run; it is okay for this to be racy
    // as the end result should be the same either way
    thirdSignal.await();
    Thread.yield();

    // Expand!
    CacheTesting.forceExpandSegment(cache, key);

    // should be reading the byte at index 10.
    // We could use a custom InputStream instead to make the read start at index 10, but since this
    // is a racy situation anyway, this behavior seems reasonable.
    assertEquals(-1, in.read());
  }

  private static class AppendableByteSource extends ByteSource {
    private byte[] bytes;

  // way in such a visibility issue would surface is most likely as a failure of cancel() to
  // propagate to the input. Cancellation propagation is fundamentally racy so this is fine.
  //
  // Future versions of the JMM may revise safe construction semantics in such a way that we can
  // safely publish these objects and we won't need this whole discussion.