public void testSameComparator() {
    assertTrue(SortedIterables.hasSameComparator(Ordering.natural(), Sets.newTreeSet()));
    // Before JDK6 (including under GWT), the TreeMap keySet is a plain Set.
    if (Maps.newTreeMap().keySet() instanceof SortedSet) {
      assertTrue(SortedIterables.hasSameComparator(Ordering.natural(), Maps.newTreeMap().keySet()));
    }
    assertTrue(

  }

  static class NonTerminalImmutableMapEntry<K, V> extends ImmutableMapEntry<K, V> {
    /*
     * Yes, we sometimes set nextInKeyBucket to null, even for this "non-terminal" entry. We don't
     * do that with a plain NonTerminalImmutableMapEntry, but we do it with the BiMap-specific
     * subclass below. That's because the Entry might be non-terminal in the key bucket but terminal
     * in the value bucket (or vice versa).
     */

   * of the same class. For example, if sublists of {@code MyList} instances were serializable,
   * those sublists might implement a private {@code MySubList} type but serialize as a plain {@code
   * MyList} to save space. So long as {@code MyList} has all the public supertypes of {@code
   * MySubList}, this is safe. For these cases, for which {@code reserializeAndAssert} is too
   * strict, use {@link #reserialize}.

           * non-null Entry objects (Entry objects that might contain null values but are not
           * themselves null), so we can treat it as a plain `Object[]`.
           */
          @SuppressWarnings("nullness")
          Object[] result = standardToArray();
          return result;
        }

        @Override

   * possible with an unsafe cast which requires {@code keys} to actually be of type {@code K}.
   *
   * @since 11.0
   */
  /*
   * <? extends Object> is mostly the same as <?> to plain Java. But to nullness checkers, they
   * differ: <? extends Object> means "non-null types," while <?> means "all types."
   */
  @Override
  public ImmutableMap<K, V> getAllPresent(Iterable<? extends Object> keys) {

 * can't get by with the standard implementations, prefer to derive a new {@code Future} instance
 * with the methods in {@link Futures} or, if necessary, to extend {@link AbstractFuture}.
 *
 * <p>Occasionally, an API will return a plain {@code Future} and it will be impossible to change
 * the return type. For this case, we provide a more expensive workaround in {@code
 * JdkFutureAdapters}. However, when possible, it is more efficient and reliable to create a {@code

   * returns. This method may be useful when testing the garbage collection mechanism itself, or
   * inhibiting a spontaneous GC initiation in subsequent code.
   *
   * <p>In contrast, a plain call to {@link java.lang.System#gc()} does not ensure finalization
   * processing and may run concurrently, for example, if the JVM flag {@code
   * -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent} is used.
   *

 *       considered "compiled comments."
 *   <li>An explicit {@code if/throw} (as illustrated below) is always acceptable; we still
 *       recommend using our {@link VerifyException} exception type. Throwing a plain {@link
 *       RuntimeException} is frowned upon.
 *   <li>Use of {@link java.util.Objects#requireNonNull(Object)} is generally discouraged, since

         * However, we don't expose currentFuture to users, so they can't attach listeners. And the
         * Future might not even be a ListenableFuture, just a plain Future. That said, similar
         * problems can exist with methods like FutureTask.done(), not to mention slow calls to
         * Thread.interrupt() (as discussed in InterruptibleTask). At the end of the day, it's

     *
     * 1. We'll want to use something like @PolyNull once we can make that work for the various
     * platforms we target.
     *
     * 2. Kotlin's Map type has a getOrDefault method that accepts and returns a "plain V," in
     * contrast to the "V?" type that we're using. As a result, Kotlin sees a conflict between the
     * nullness annotations in ImmutableMap and those in its own Map type. In response, it considers