dstIndex += 2;

        /* windows98 has what appears to be another 4 0's followed by the share
         * name as a zero terminated ascii string "\TMP" + '\0'
         *
         * As is this works, but it deviates from the spec section 4.1.6.6 but
         * maybe I should put it in. Wonder what NT does?
         */

        return dstIndex - start;
    }

import java.lang.annotation.Target;

/**
 * Signifies that a test should not be run under Android. This annotation is respected only by our
 * Google-internal Android suite generators. Note that those generators also suppress any test
 * 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:
 *

        dstIndex += 2;

        /*
         * windows98 has what appears to be another 4 0's followed by the share
         * name as a zero terminated ascii string "\TMP" + '\0'
         *
         * As is this works, but it deviates from the spec section 4.1.6.6 but
         * maybe I should put it in. Wonder what NT does?
         */

        return dstIndex - start;
    }


    /**

 * iterator} method only once, and should be tested using this class. Exceptions to this rule should
 * be clearly documented.
 *
 * <p>Note that although your APIs should be liberal in what they accept, your methods which
 * <i>return</i> iterables should make every attempt to return ones of the robust variety.
 *
 * <p>This testing utility is not thread-safe.
 *
 * @author Kevin Bourrillion

import java.lang.annotation.Target;

/**
 * Signifies that a test should not be run under Android. This annotation is respected only by our
 * Google-internal Android suite generators. Note that those generators also suppress any test
 * 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:
 *

 * iterator} method only once, and should be tested using this class. Exceptions to this rule should
 * be clearly documented.
 *
 * <p>Note that although your APIs should be liberal in what they accept, your methods which
 * <i>return</i> iterables should make every attempt to return ones of the robust variety.
 *
 * <p>This testing utility is not thread-safe.
 *
 * @author Kevin Bourrillion

    SettableFuture<?> unused = SettableFuture.create();
    // Hack to load AbstractFuture et. al. in a new classloader so that it tries to re-read the
    // cancellation-cause system property. This allows us to test what happens if reading the
    // property is forbidden and then continue running tests normally in one jvm without resorting
    // to even crazier hacks to reset static final boolean fields.

  }

  /**
   * Returns the {@link Method} instance for {@link #testAddAll_unsupportedNonePresent()} so that
   * tests can suppress it with {@code FeatureSpecificTestSuiteBuilder.suppressing()} while we
   * figure out what to do with <a href="http://goo.gl/qJBruX">{@code ConcurrentHashMap} support for
   * {@code entrySet().add()}</a>.
   */
  @J2ktIncompatible

  }

  /**
   * Returns the {@link Method} instance for {@link #testAddAll_unsupportedNonePresent()} so that
   * tests can suppress it with {@code FeatureSpecificTestSuiteBuilder.suppressing()} while we
   * figure out what to do with <a href="http://goo.gl/qJBruX">{@code ConcurrentHashMap} support for
   * {@code entrySet().add()}</a>.
   */
  @J2ktIncompatible

    /*
     * The entrySet() of ConcurrentHashMap, unlike that of other Map
     * implementations, supports add() under JDK8. This seems problematic, but I
     * didn't see that discussed in the review, which included many other
     * changes: http://goo.gl/okTTdr
     *
     * TODO(cpovirk): decide what the best long-term action here is: force users