assertThat(newArray).isEqualTo(new byte[] {(byte) 0, (byte) 1, (byte) 2});
    newArray[1] = (byte) 5;
    assertThat((byte) list.get(1)).isEqualTo((byte) 1);
  }

  // This test stems from a real bug found by andrewk
  public void testAsList_subList_toArray_roundTrip() {
    byte[] array = {(byte) 0, (byte) 1, (byte) 2, (byte) 3};
    List<Byte> list = Bytes.asList(array);

   * k <= i < n}.
   *
   * <p>After this method returns, {@code elements} will contain no duplicates, but {@code elements}
   * may be the real array backing the returned set, so do not modify it further.
   *
   * <p>{@code elements} may contain only values of type {@code E}.
   *

 * </ul>
 *
 * @author James Sexton
 * @author Joshua O'Madadhain
 * @param <N> Node parameter type
 * @param <E> Edge parameter type
 * @since 20.0
 */
@Beta
@DoNotMock("Use NetworkBuilder to create a real instance")
@ElementTypesAreNonnullByDefault
public interface Network<N, E> extends SuccessorsFunction<N>, PredecessorsFunction<N> {
  //
  // Network-level accessors
  //

    list.set(0, (int) 4);
    assertThat(newArray).isEqualTo(new int[] {(int) 0, (int) 1, (int) 2});
    newArray[1] = (int) 5;
    assertThat((int) list.get(1)).isEqualTo((int) 1);
  }

  // This test stems from a real bug found by andrewk
  public void testAsList_subList_toArray_roundTrip() {
    int[] array = {(int) 0, (int) 1, (int) 2, (int) 3};
    List<Integer> list = Ints.asList(array);

  public int hashCode() {
    int hashCode = 1;
    int n = size();
    for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
      hashCode = 31 * hashCode + get(i).hashCode();

      hashCode = ~~hashCode;
      // needed to deal with GWT integer overflow
    }
    return hashCode;
  }

  /*
   * Serializes ImmutableLists as their logical contents. This ensures that

    assertThat(newArray).isEqualTo(new char[] {(char) 0, (char) 1, (char) 2});
    newArray[1] = (char) 5;
    assertThat((char) list.get(1)).isEqualTo((char) 1);
  }

  // This test stems from a real bug found by andrewk
  public void testAsList_subList_toArray_roundTrip() {
    char[] array = {(char) 0, (char) 1, (char) 2, (char) 3};
    List<Character> list = Chars.asList(array);

 *             return createExpensiveGraph(key);
 *           }
 *         });
 * }</pre>
 *
 * <p>Or equivalently,
 *
 * <pre>{@code
 * // In real life this would come from a command-line flag or config file
 * String spec = "maximumSize=10000,expireAfterWrite=10m";
 *
 * LoadingCache<Key, Graph> graphs = CacheBuilder.from(spec)
 *     .removalListener(MY_LISTENER)

     * guaranteed to be either exact or one less than the correct value. This follows from fact that
     * floor(floor(x)/i) == floor(x/i) for any real x and integer i != 0. The proof is not quite
     * trivial.
     */
    long quotient = ((dividend >>> 1) / divisor) << 1;
    long rem = dividend - quotient * divisor;

         * This avoids out-of-control memory consumption, and it keeps the cache from growing so
         * large that doing the lookup is noticeably slower than redoing the work would be.
         *
         * Ideally we'd have a real eviction policy, but until we see a problem in practice, I hope
         * that this will suffice. I have not even benchmarked with different size limits.
         */
        if (validClasses.size() > 1000) {

   * The problem with these is that remove(K, long) has to be done in two phases by definition ---
   * first decrementing to zero, and then removing. putIfAbsent or replace could observe the
   * intermediate zero-state. Ways we could deal with this are:
   *
   * - Don't define any of the ConcurrentMap operations. This is the current state of affairs.
   *
   * - Define putIfAbsent and replace as treating zero and absent identically (as currently