* to forward to this implementation.
   *
   * @since 7.0
   */
  @Override
  protected boolean standardRemoveAll(Collection<?> elementsToRemove) {
    return Multisets.removeAllImpl(this, elementsToRemove);
  }

  /**
   * A sensible definition of {@link #retainAll} in terms of the {@code retainAll} method of {@link

   */
  private static void movePivotToStartOfSlice(double[] array, int from, int to) {
    int mid = (from + to) >>> 1;
    // We want to make a swap such that either array[to] <= array[from] <= array[mid], or
    // array[mid] <= array[from] <= array[to]. We know that from < to, so we know mid < to
    // (although it's possible that mid == from, if to == from + 1). Note that the postcondition

   * listeners are also applicable to heavyweight functions passed to this method.
   *
   * <p>The returned {@code Future} attempts to keep its cancellation state in sync with that of the
   * input future. That is, if the returned {@code Future} is cancelled, it will attempt to cancel
   * the input, and if the input is cancelled, the returned {@code Future} will receive a callback

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

    // length to truncate the sequence to, not including the truncation indicator
    int truncationLength = maxLength - truncationIndicator.length();

    // in this worst case, this allows a maxLength equal to the length of the truncationIndicator,
    // meaning that a string will be truncated to just the truncation indicator itself
    checkArgument(
        truncationLength >= 0,

  //    - implement Serializable
  //    - redo the API to be as close to identical to ReentrantLock as possible,
  //      since, after all, this class is also a reentrant mutual exclusion lock!?

  /*
   * One of the key challenges of this class is to prevent lost signals, while trying hard to
   * minimize unnecessary signals. One simple and correct algorithm is to signal some other waiter

   * first one specified is included.
   *
   * <p>Despite the method name, this method attempts to avoid actually copying the data when it is
   * safe to do so. The exact circumstances under which a copy will or will not be performed are
   * undocumented and subject to change.
   *

 * permits being adjusted to ensure that the configured rate is maintained.
 *
 * <p>It is possible to configure a {@code RateLimiter} to have a warmup period during which time
 * the permits issued each second steadily increases until it hits the stable rate.
 *
 * <p>As an example, imagine that we have a list of tasks to execute, but we don't want to submit
 * more than 2 per second:
 *
 * <pre>{@code

     *
     * We rely on checkers to implement special cases to catch dangerous calls to join(), etc. based
     * on what they know about the particular Joiner instances the calls are performed on.
     *
     * (In addition to useForNull, we also offer skipNulls. It, too, tolerates null inputs, but its
     * tolerance is implemented differently: Its implementation avoids calling this toString(Object)
     * method in the first place.)

 *       to check for a cycle that reaches the lock to be acquired. If no cycle is detected, a new
 *       "safe" edge is created.
 *   <li>If a cycle is detected, an "unsafe" (cyclic) edge is created to represent a potential
 *       deadlock situation, and the appropriate Policy is executed.
 * </ul>
 *