// This gives minimal coverage to the forwarding functions
  public void testToImmutableTableSanityTest() {
    Collector<Cell<String, String, Integer>, ?, ImmutableTable<String, String, Integer>> collector =
        TableCollectors.toImmutableTable(Cell::getRowKey, Cell::getColumnKey, Cell::getValue);
    CollectorTester.of(collector)
        .expectCollects(ImmutableTable.of())

   */
  @Override
  public Set<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>> cellSet() {
    return super.cellSet();
  }

  @Override
  Iterator<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>> cellIterator() {
    return new AbstractIndexedListIterator<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>>(size()) {
      @Override
      protected Cell<R, C, @Nullable V> get(final int index) {
        return getCell(index);
      }
    };

   */
  @Override
  public Set<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>> cellSet() {
    return super.cellSet();
  }

  @Override
  Iterator<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>> cellIterator() {
    return new AbstractIndexedListIterator<Cell<R, C, @Nullable V>>(size()) {
      @Override
      protected Cell<R, C, @Nullable V> get(final int index) {
        return getCell(index);
      }
    };

 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> avoid <i>direct</i> usage of {@link ImmutableCollection} as a type (just as
 * with {@link Collection} itself). Prefer subtypes such as {@link ImmutableSet} or {@link
 * ImmutableList}, which have well-defined {@link #equals} semantics, thus avoiding a common source
 * of bugs and confusion.
 *
 * <h3>About <i>all</i> {@code Immutable-} collections</h3>
 *

 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> avoid <i>direct</i> usage of {@link ImmutableCollection} as a type (just as
 * with {@link Collection} itself). Prefer subtypes such as {@link ImmutableSet} or {@link
 * ImmutableList}, which have well-defined {@link #equals} semantics, thus avoiding a common source
 * of bugs and confusion.
 *
 * <h3>About <i>all</i> {@code Immutable-} collections</h3>
 *

 *   <li>It doesn't provide much control of threading.
 *   <li>It doesn't offer much monitoring.
 *   <li>It doesn't propagate exceptions, so apps don't have a way to react to them.
 *   <li>It doesn't interoperate well with RxJava, coroutines, and other more commonly used
 *       alternatives.
 *   <li>It imposes requirements on the lifecycle of its subscribers. For example, if an event

            //
            // 2. not to cancel any Future the user returned from an AsyncCallable
            //
            // We promise this because, once we cancel that Future, we would no longer be able to
            // tell when any underlying work it is doing is done. Thus, we might start a new task
            // while that underlying work is still running.
            //
            // So that is why we cancel only in the case of CAS success.

 * not</b> change the behavior of {@link #add(Object)}, which can lead to unexpected behavior. In
 * this case, you should override {@code add(Object)} as well, either providing your own
 * implementation, or delegating to the provided {@code standardAdd} method.
 *
 * <p><b>{@code default} method warning:</b> This class does <i>not</i> forward calls to {@code

 * methods of the delegate. For example, overriding {@link #put} alone <i>will not</i> change the
 * behavior of {@link #putAll}, which can lead to unexpected behavior. In this case, you should
 * override {@code putAll} as well, either providing your own implementation, or delegating to the
 * provided {@code standardPutAll} method.
 *
 * <p><b>{@code default} method warning:</b> This class does <i>not</i> forward calls to {@code

    /**
     * Following the contract of {@link AbstractQueuedSynchronizer} we create a private subclass to
     * hold the synchronizer. This synchronizer is used to implement the blocking and waiting calls
     * as well as to handle state changes in a thread-safe manner. The current state of the future
     * is held in the Sync state, and the lock is released whenever the state changes to {@link