return endpoint;
  }

  @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // catching CCE
  @Override
  public boolean equals(@CheckForNull Object obj) {
    if (obj instanceof Cut) {
      // It might not really be a Cut<C>, but we'll catch a CCE if it's not
      Cut<C> that = (Cut<C>) obj;
      try {
        int compareResult = compareTo(that);
        return compareResult == 0;
      } catch (ClassCastException wastNotComparableToOurType) {

  }

  @AfterExperiment
  void tearDown() {
    double req = requests.get();
    double hit = req - misses.get();

    // Currently, this is going into /dev/null, but I'll fix that
    System.out.println("hit rate: " + hit / req);
  }

  // for proper distributions later:
  // import JSci.maths.statistics.ProbabilityDistribution;
  // int key = (int) dist.inverse(random.nextDouble());

    return indexOf(target) >= 0;
  }

  @GwtIncompatible // super.subListUnchecked does not exist; inherited subList is valid if slow
  /*
   * TODO(cpovirk): if we start to override indexOf/lastIndexOf under GWT, we'll want some way to
   * override subList to return an ImmutableSortedAsList for better performance. Right now, I'm not
   * sure there's any performance hit from our failure to override subListUnchecked under GWT
   */
  @Override

 * the configuration properties of the original map. During deserialization, if the original map had
 * used weak references, the entries are reconstructed as they were, but it's not unlikely they'll
 * be quickly garbage-collected before they are ever accessed.
 *
 * <p>{@code new MapMaker().weakKeys().makeMap()} is a recommended replacement for {@link

      while (tableSize * DESIRED_LOAD_FACTOR < setSize) {
        tableSize <<= 1;
      }
      return tableSize;
    }

    // The table can't be completely full or we'll get infinite reprobes
    checkArgument(setSize < MAX_TABLE_SIZE, "collection too large");
    return MAX_TABLE_SIZE;
  }

  /**

    // for 5.5 seconds happens about 2% of the time.
    boolean longWait = TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS.toSeconds(thread.timeSpentBlocked) >= 5;
    // Count how long it actually took to return; we'll accept any number between the expected delay
    // and the approximate actual delay, to be robust to variance in thread scheduling.
    char overWaitNanosFirstDigit =
        Long.toString(

  private ClassToInstanceMap<Number> map;

  @Override
  protected void setUp() throws Exception {
    map = MutableClassToInstanceMap.create();
  }

  public void testConstraint() {

    /**
     * We'll give ourselves a pass on testing all the possible ways of breaking the constraint,
     * because we know that newClassMap() is implemented using ConstrainedMap which is itself

  private ClassToInstanceMap<Number> map;

  @Override
  protected void setUp() throws Exception {
    map = MutableClassToInstanceMap.create();
  }

  public void testConstraint() {

    /**
     * We'll give ourselves a pass on testing all the possible ways of breaking the constraint,
     * because we know that newClassMap() is implemented using ConstrainedMap which is itself

     *   ...))`
     *
     * So it makes sense for the parameter (and thus the return type) to be @CheckForNull.
     *
     * Two other points:
     *
     * 1. We'll want to use something like @PolyNull once we can make that work for the various
     * platforms we target.
     *
     * 2. Kotlin's Map type has a getOrDefault method that accepts and returns a "plain V," in

      LoadingCache<Integer, String> cache,
      CountingRemovalListener<Integer, String> removalListener) {

    // initialSize will most likely be 2, but it's possible for the GC to have already run, so we'll
    // observe a size of 1
    long initialSize = cache.size();
    assertTrue(initialSize == 1 || initialSize == 2);

    // wait up to 5s
    byte[] filler = new byte[1024];
    for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++) {