for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
          array[i] = counter.getAndIncrement();
        }
        builder.addAll(ImmutableIntArray.copyOf(array));
      }
    },
    ADD_LARGER_ARRAY {
      @Override
      void doIt(ImmutableIntArray.Builder builder, AtomicInteger counter) {
        int[] array = new int[RANDOM.nextInt(200) + 200];
        for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {

  /** The instance that actually does the work; delegates to Unsafe or a pure-Java fallback. */
  private static final LittleEndianBytes byteArray;

  /**
   * Load 8 bytes into long in a little endian manner, from the substring between position and
   * position + 8. The array must have at least 8 bytes from offset (inclusive).
   *
   * @param input the input bytes
   * @param offset the offset into the array at which to start

   * Returns an immutable array containing the same values as {@code this} array. This is logically
   * a no-op, and in some circumstances {@code this} itself is returned. However, if this instance
   * is a {@link #subArray} view of a larger array, this method will copy only the appropriate range
   * of values, resulting in an equivalent array with a smaller memory footprint.
   */
  public ImmutableLongArray trimmed() {

    // we try hard to make them robust in practice.  We could additionally try to add in a system
    // load timeout multiplier.  Or we could try to use a CPU time bound instead of wall clock time
    // bound.  But these ideas are harder to implement.  We do not try to detect or handle a
    // user-specified -XX:+DisableExplicitGC.
    //
    // TODO(user): Consider using
    // java/lang/management/OperatingSystemMXBean.html#getSystemLoadAverage()

        for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
          array[i] = counter.getAndIncrement();
        }
        builder.addAll(ImmutableIntArray.copyOf(array));
      }
    },
    ADD_LARGER_ARRAY {
      @Override
      void doIt(ImmutableIntArray.Builder builder, AtomicInteger counter) {
        int[] array = new int[RANDOM.nextInt(200) + 200];
        for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {

     * including in MapRetrievalCache, so I'm not sure why this one is different. I did at least
     * confirm that my change to MapIteratorCache fixes the TSAN error in the (larger) test it was
     * originally reported in.
     */
    for (Future<?> future : futures.build()) {
      future.get();
    }
    executor.shutdown();
  }

     * including in MapRetrievalCache, so I'm not sure why this one is different. I did at least
     * confirm that my change to MapIteratorCache fixes the TSAN error in the (larger) test it was
     * originally reported in.
     */
    for (Future<?> future : futures.build()) {
      future.get();
    }
    executor.shutdown();
  }

 *
 * <p>Unlike {@code java.util.HashMap}, iteration is only proportional to the actual {@code size()},
 * which is optimal, and <i>not</i> the size of the internal hashtable, which could be much larger
 * than {@code size()}. Furthermore, this structure places significantly reduced load on the garbage
 * collector by only using a constant number of internal objects.
 *

 * Stats}, {@link PairedStatsAccumulator}, and {@link PairedStats}.
 *
 * @author Pete Gillin
 */
class StatsTesting {
  // TODO(cpovirk): Convince myself that this larger error makes sense.
  static final double ALLOWED_ERROR = isAndroid() ? .25 : 1e-10;

  // Inputs and their statistics:

  static final double ONE_VALUE = 12.34;

  static final double OTHER_ONE_VALUE = -56.78;

   * SoftReference} (by default, strong references are used). Softly-referenced objects will be
   * garbage-collected in a <i>globally</i> least-recently-used manner, in response to memory
   * demand.
   *
   * <p><b>Warning:</b> in most circumstances it is better to set a per-cache {@linkplain