How much of the system resources do you want to be consuming/utilizing? It might be easy to think "not much", but in reality, you will probably want to consume **as much as possible without crashing**.

   * example, {@code [] < [1L] < [1L, 2L] < [2L] < [1L << 63]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(long[],
   * long[])}.
   */
  public static Comparator<long[]> lexicographicalComparator() {
    return LexicographicalComparator.INSTANCE;
  }

   * lesser. For example, {@code [] < [1.0f] < [1.0f, 2.0f] < [2.0f]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(float[],
   * float[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<float[]> lexicographicalComparator() {
    return LexicographicalComparator.INSTANCE;

    public boolean equals(@CheckForNull Object obj) {
      if (obj instanceof ContainsPatternPredicate) {
        ContainsPatternPredicate that = (ContainsPatternPredicate) obj;

        // Pattern uses Object (identity) equality, so we have to reach
        // inside to compare individual fields.
        return Objects.equal(pattern.pattern(), that.pattern.pattern())
            && pattern.flags() == that.pattern.flags();
      }

   * lesser. For example, {@code [] < [false] < [false, true] < [true]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(boolean[],
   * boolean[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<boolean[]> lexicographicalComparator() {

   * array as the lesser. For example, {@code [] < ['a'] < ['a', 'b'] < ['b']}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(char[],
   * char[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<char[]> lexicographicalComparator() {
    return LexicographicalComparator.INSTANCE;

   *   <li>Every edge in A and B connects the same nodes in the same direction (if any).
   * </ul>
   *
   * <p>Network properties besides {@link #isDirected() directedness} do <b>not</b> affect equality.
   * For example, two networks may be considered equal even if one allows parallel edges and the
   * other doesn't. Additionally, the order in which nodes or edges are added to the network, and

		// a less or equal b
	}
	if bytes.Compare(a, b) > 0 {
		// a greater b
	}
	if bytes.Compare(a, b) >= 0 {
		// a greater or equal b
	}

	// Prefer Equal to Compare for equality comparisons.
	if bytes.Equal(a, b) {
		// a equal b
	}
	if !bytes.Equal(a, b) {
		// a not equal b
	}
}

func ExampleCompare_search() {
	// Binary search to find a matching byte slice.

   * lesser. For example, {@code [] < [1.0] < [1.0, 2.0] < [2.0]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(double[],
   * double[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<double[]> lexicographicalComparator() {

            underlying_devices_[component_index], underlying_devices_[0])) {
      // Device names are from different address spaces, or we can't figure out
      // whether they are, so we'll fully-qualify everything.
      return underlying_devices_;
    }
  }
  std::vector<std::string> local_names;
  local_names.reserve(underlying_devices_.size());
  for (const DeviceNameUtils::ParsedName& parsed_component :