* Don't store a new Iterator until we know the user can't remove() the last returned
         * element anymore. Otherwise, when we remove from the old iterator, we may be invalidating
         * the new one. The result is a ConcurrentModificationException or other bad behavior.
         *
         * (If we decide that we really, really hate allocating two Iterators per cycle instead of

    TypeToken<List<String>> b = new TypeToken<List<String>>() {};
    assertEquals(a, b);
  }

  public <T> void testVariableTypeTokenNotAllowed() {
    /*
     * We'd use assertThrows here, but that causes no exception to be thrown under Java 8,
     * presumably because the ThrowingRunnable lambda triggers some kind of bug in Java 8's
     * reflection implementation.
     */
    try {

    // don't execute 'immediately'.  By checking isDone here we avoid that.
    // A corollary to all that is that we don't need to check isDone inside the loop because if we
    // get into the loop we know that we weren't done when we entered and therefore we aren't under
    // an obligation to execute 'immediately'.
    if (!isDone()) {
      Listener oldHead = listeners;

          // We're careful to put only K instances in.
          K[] sortedKs = (K[]) sortedKeys;
          Arrays.sort(sortedKs, comparator);
          Object[] sortedValues = new Object[size];

          // We might, somehow, be able to reorder values in-place.  But it doesn't seem like
          // there's a way around creating the separate sortedKeys array, and if we're allocating

   */
  public static void checkState(
      boolean expression,
      /*
       * TODO(cpovirk): Consider removing @CheckForNull here, as we've done with the other methods'
       * errorMessageTemplate parameters: It is unlikely that callers intend for their string
       * template to be null (though we do handle that case gracefully at runtime). I've left this
       * one as it is because one of our users has defined a wrapper API around Preconditions,

    assertEquals(1, callCount.get());
    for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
      // doConcurrentGet alternates between calling getUnchecked and calling get. If we call get(),
      // we should get an ExecutionException; if we call getUnchecked(), we should get an
      // UncheckedExecutionException.
      int mod = i % 3;
      if (mod == 0 || mod == 2) {

    SortedMap<String, Double> transformed = transformValues(map, SQRT_FUNCTION);

    /*
     * We'd like to sanity check that we didn't get a NavigableMap out, but we
     * can't easily do so while maintaining GWT compatibility.
     */
    assertEquals(ImmutableSortedMap.of("a", 2.0, "b", 3.0), transformed);
  }

    SortedMap<String, Double> transformed = transformValues(map, SQRT_FUNCTION);

    /*
     * We'd like to sanity check that we didn't get a NavigableMap out, but we
     * can't easily do so while maintaining GWT compatibility.
     */
    assertEquals(ImmutableSortedMap.of("a", 2.0, "b", 3.0), transformed);
  }

      if (oldCapacity >= MAXIMUM_CAPACITY) {
        return;
      }

      /*
       * Reclassify nodes in each list to new Map. Because we are using power-of-two expansion, the
       * elements from each bin must either stay at same index, or move with a power of two offset.
       * We eliminate unnecessary node creation by catching cases where old nodes can be reused

   * that have nullable bounds? Unfortunately, if we change the parameter to TypeParameter<? extends
   * @Nullable X>, then users might pass a TypeParameter<Y>, where Y is a subtype of X, while still
   * passing a TypeToken<X>. This would be invalid. Maybe we could accept a TypeParameter<@PolyNull
   * X> if we support such a thing? It would be weird or misleading for users to be able to pass