* containers with a known order other than insertion order must override this method.
   *
   * <p>Note: This default implementation is overkill (but valid) for an unordered container. An
   * equally valid implementation for an unordered container is to throw an exception. The chosen
   * implementation, however, has the advantage of working for insertion-ordered containers, as

 *   <li>hasNext()
 *   <li>hasNext();
 *   <li>remove();
 *   <li>next();
 * </ol>
 *
 * <p>This particular order of operations may be unrealistic, and testing all 3^5 of them may be
 * thought of as overkill; however, it's difficult to determine which proper subset of this massive
 * set would be sufficient to expose any possible bug. Brute force is simpler.
 *
 * <p>To use this class the concrete subclass must implement the {@link

   * containers with a known order other than insertion order must override this method.
   *
   * <p>Note: This default implementation is overkill (but valid) for an unordered container. An
   * equally valid implementation for an unordered container is to throw an exception. The chosen
   * implementation, however, has the advantage of working for insertion-ordered containers, as

   * containers with a known order other than insertion order must override this method.
   *
   * <p>Note: This default implementation is overkill (but valid) for an unordered container. An
   * equally valid implementation for an unordered container is to throw an exception. The chosen
   * implementation, however, has the advantage of working for insertion-ordered containers, as

   * accessed directly by subclasses.
   *
   * Table entries are of class Cell; a variant of AtomicLong padded
   * to reduce cache contention on most processors. Padding is
   * overkill for most Atomics because they are usually irregularly
   * scattered in memory and thus don't interfere much with each
   * other. But Atomic objects residing in arrays will tend to be

   * containers with a known order other than insertion order must override this method.
   *
   * <p>Note: This default implementation is overkill (but valid) for an unordered container. An
   * equally valid implementation for an unordered container is to throw an exception. The chosen
   * implementation, however, has the advantage of working for insertion-ordered containers, as

  }

  @GwtIncompatible // Shorts.fromByteArray, Shorts.toByteArray
  public void testByteArrayRoundTrips() {
    Random r = new Random(5);
    byte[] b = new byte[Shorts.BYTES];

    // total overkill, but, it takes 0.1 sec so why not...
    for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
      short num = (short) r.nextInt();
      assertThat(Shorts.fromByteArray(Shorts.toByteArray(num))).isEqualTo(num);

      r.nextBytes(b);

 *   <li>hasNext()
 *   <li>hasNext();
 *   <li>remove();
 *   <li>next();
 * </ol>
 *
 * <p>This particular order of operations may be unrealistic, and testing all 3^5 of them may be
 * thought of as overkill; however, it's difficult to determine which proper subset of this massive
 * set would be sufficient to expose any possible bug. Brute force is simpler.
 *
 * <p>To use this class the concrete subclass must implement the {@link

  // below by testing their text-processing methods.

  // The organization of this test class is unusual, as it's not done by
  // method, but by overall "scenario". Also, the variety of actual tests we
  // do borders on absurd overkill. Better safe than sorry, though?

  @GwtIncompatible // java.util.BitSet
  public void testSetBits() {
    doTestSetBits(CharMatcher.any());

  // below by testing their text-processing methods.

  // The organization of this test class is unusual, as it's not done by
  // method, but by overall "scenario". Also, the variety of actual tests we
  // do borders on absurd overkill. Better safe than sorry, though?

  @GwtIncompatible // java.util.BitSet
  public void testSetBits() {
    doTestSetBits(CharMatcher.any());