* transitionService in the wrong order due to a race. Due to the fact that it is a race this test
   * isn't guaranteed to expose the issue, but it is at least likely to become flaky if the race
   * sneaks back in, and in this case flaky means something is definitely wrong.
   *
   * <p>Before the bug was fixed this test would fail at least 30% of the time.
   */

   *
   * <p>If {@code expectedSize} is exactly the number of distinct elements added to the builder
   * before {@link Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized
   * {@link #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,

     * real problem: The Entry objects are ImmutableMap entries, whose fields are all final and thus
     * safe to read even when the Entry object is unsafely published. But with a mutable graph, the
     * Entry object is likely to have a non-final value field, which is not safe to read when
     * unsafely published. (The Entry object might even be newly created by each iterator.next()

   *
   * <p>If {@code expectedSize} is exactly the number of elements added to the builder before {@link
   * Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized {@link
   * #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,

     * real problem: The Entry objects are ImmutableMap entries, whose fields are all final and thus
     * safe to read even when the Entry object is unsafely published. But with a mutable graph, the
     * Entry object is likely to have a non-final value field, which is not safe to read when
     * unsafely published. (The Entry object might even be newly created by each iterator.next()

          // likely number of trials to have proven 2-bit candidate
          // is not a characteristic
          count++;
          if (count > maxCount) {
            Assert.fail(
                "2-bit delta ("
                    + i
                    + ", "
                    + j
                    + ") is likely a "

        count++;
      }
    }
    return count;
  }

  /**
   * Reverses the elements of {@code array}. This is equivalent to {@code
   * Collections.reverse(Booleans.asList(array))}, but is likely to be more efficient.
   *
   * @since 23.1
   */
  public static void reverse(boolean[] array) {
    checkNotNull(array);
    reverse(array, 0, array.length);
  }

  /**

    reverse(array, fromIndex, toIndex);
  }

  /**
   * Reverses the elements of {@code array}. This is equivalent to {@code
   * Collections.reverse(Shorts.asList(array))}, but is likely to be more efficient.
   *
   * @since 23.1
   */
  public static void reverse(short[] array) {
    checkNotNull(array);
    reverse(array, 0, array.length);
  }

  /**

    reverse(array, fromIndex, toIndex);
  }

  /**
   * Reverses the elements of {@code array}. This is equivalent to {@code
   * Collections.reverse(Longs.asList(array))}, but is likely to be more efficient.
   *
   * @since 23.1
   */
  public static void reverse(long[] array) {
    checkNotNull(array);
    reverse(array, 0, array.length);
  }

  /**

  // except that when sortedDelegate's comparator is null, it points to a
  // non-null instance of Ordering.natural().
  // (cpovirk: Is sortedDelegate's comparator really ever null?)
  // The comparator will likely also differ because of our nullAccepting hack.
  // See the bottom of the file for more information about it.
  private final transient Comparator<? super K> comparator;