private static final int DEFAULT_CAPACITY = 11;

  @VisibleForTesting
  static int initialQueueSize(
      int configuredExpectedSize, int maximumSize, Iterable<?> initialContents) {
    // Start with what they said, if they said it, otherwise DEFAULT_CAPACITY
    int result =
        (configuredExpectedSize == Builder.UNSET_EXPECTED_SIZE)
            ? DEFAULT_CAPACITY
            : configuredExpectedSize;

 * the reference is "absent"); it is never said to "contain {@code null}".
 *
 * <p>A non-null {@code Optional<T>} reference can be used as a replacement for a nullable {@code T}
 * reference. It allows you to represent "a {@code T} that must be present" and a "a {@code T} that
 * might be absent" as two distinct types in your program, which can aid clarity.
 *
 * <p>Some uses of this class include
 *
 * <ul>

     * determined experimentally to match our desired probability of false positives.
     */
    // NB: yes, this is surprisingly high, but that's what the experiments said was necessary
    // Raising this number slows the worst-case contains behavior, speeds up hashFloodingDetected,
    // and reduces the false-positive probability.
    static final int MAX_RUN_MULTIPLIER = 13;

    /**

 * the reference is "absent"); it is never said to "contain {@code null}".
 *
 * <p>A non-null {@code Optional<T>} reference can be used as a replacement for a nullable {@code T}
 * reference. It allows you to represent "a {@code T} that must be present" and a "a {@code T} that
 * might be absent" as two distinct types in your program, which can aid clarity.
 *
 * <p>Some uses of this class include
 *
 * <ul>

   *
   * 2. `other[size] = null` is unsound. We could "fix" this by requiring callers to pass in an
   * array with a nullable element type. But probably they usually want an array with a non-nullable
   * type. That said, we could *accept* a `@Nullable T[]` (which, given that we treat arrays as
   * covariant, would still permit a plain `T[]`) and return a plain `T[]`. But of course that would

   *
   * 2. `other[size] = null` is unsound. We could "fix" this by requiring callers to pass in an
   * array with a nullable element type. But probably they usually want an array with a non-nullable
   * type. That said, we could *accept* a `@Nullable T[]` (which, given that we treat arrays as
   * covariant, would still permit a plain `T[]`) and return a plain `T[]`. But of course that would

 *       1 to 100."
 *   <li>When evaluated as a {@link Predicate}, a range yields the same result as invoking {@link
 *       #contains}.
 *   <li>Terminology note: a range {@code a} is said to be the <i>maximal</i> range having property
 *       <i>P</i> if, for all ranges {@code b} also having property <i>P</i>, {@code a.encloses(b)}.

    return createFromEntries(entries);
  }

  public abstract Set<Entry<K, V>> createFromEntries(Entry<K, V>[] entries);

  @Override
  @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // generic arrays make typesafety sad
  public Entry<K, V>[] createArray(int length) {
    return (Entry<K, V>[]) new Entry<?, ?>[length];
  }

  /** Returns the original element list, unchanged. */
  @Override

annas?esnonihs??o&gasa!kat??ka?n&ikat?o?ustat??rihsay?sihs?tomus?yas??u&bay?gnihs?????hih,konip,l&bs,ik,?mol,nagan!.&a&bukah?d&a&w?yim??e&ki?u??ii??k&a&s&ay?uki??zus??ihsoo?ousay??m&ay&akat?ii??i&hsukufosik?jii??ukihc??n&i!hsetat??uzii??r&ah?ugot??saim?t&agamay?oyim??w&a&g&a&kan?n??o??kustam?ziurak??onim!imanim??u&koo?s!omihs????ya&ko?rih???e&akas?nagamok?subo??i&gakat?h&asa?c&a!mo!nanihs???uonamay??sukagot??k&a&kas?mimanim?to??ia&atik?imanim??oa?uzihcom??m&akawak?ijuf?o!t???r&ato?ijoihs?omakat?...