this.replacements = escaperMap.getReplacementArray();
    this.replacementsLength = replacements.length;
    if (safeMax < safeMin) {
      // If the safe range is empty, set the range limits to opposite extremes
      // to ensure the first test of either value will (almost certainly) fail.
      safeMax = Character.MIN_VALUE;
      safeMin = Character.MAX_VALUE;
    }
    this.safeMin = safeMin;

    this.replacements = escaperMap.getReplacementArray();
    this.replacementsLength = replacements.length;
    if (safeMax < safeMin) {
      // If the safe range is empty, set the range limits to opposite extremes
      // to ensure the first test of either value will fail.
      safeMax = -1;
      safeMin = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
    }
    this.safeMin = safeMin;
    this.safeMax = safeMax;

      runnables = null; // allow GC to free listeners even if this stays around for a while.
    }
    // If we succeeded then list holds all the runnables we to execute. The pairs in the stack are
    // in the opposite order from how they were added so we need to reverse the list to fulfill our
    // contract.
    // This is somewhat annoying, but turns out to be very fast in practice. Alternatively, we could

        assertTrue(shorter.equals(longer), "Shorter equals longer when prefix matches (implementation behavior)");

        // In the opposite direction, an out-of-bounds occurs internally and is caught as false
        assertFalse(longer.equals(shorter), "Longer does not equal shorter (implementation behavior)");
    }

  }

  public void testDeadlock_twoLocks() {
    // Establish an acquisition order of lockA -> lockB.
    lockA.lock();
    lockB.lock();
    lockA.unlock();
    lockB.unlock();

    // The opposite order should fail (Policies.THROW).
    PotentialDeadlockException firstException = null;
    lockB.lock();
    PotentialDeadlockException expected =

  }

  public void testDeadlock_twoLocks() {
    // Establish an acquisition order of lockA -> lockB.
    lockA.lock();
    lockB.lock();
    lockA.unlock();
    lockB.unlock();

    // The opposite order should fail (Policies.THROW).
    PotentialDeadlockException firstException = null;
    lockB.lock();
    PotentialDeadlockException expected =

        // has already been moved.
        parent = elementData(removeIndex);
      } else {
        parent = elementData(getParentIndex(removeIndex));
      }
      // bubble it up the opposite heap
      if (otherHeap.bubbleUpAlternatingLevels(crossOver, toTrickle) < removeIndex) {
        return new MoveDesc<>(toTrickle, parent);
      } else {
        return null;
      }
    }

        // has already been moved.
        parent = elementData(removeIndex);
      } else {
        parent = elementData(getParentIndex(removeIndex));
      }
      // bubble it up the opposite heap
      if (otherHeap.bubbleUpAlternatingLevels(crossOver, toTrickle) < removeIndex) {
        return new MoveDesc<>(toTrickle, parent);
      } else {
        return null;
      }
    }

     * constructor's. This is an arbitrary rule since no existing language spec mandates one way or
     * the other. From the declaration syntax, the class type parameter appears first, but the call
     * syntax may show up in opposite order such as {@code new <A>Foo<B>()}.
     */
    @Override
    public final TypeVariable<?>[] getTypeParameters() {
      TypeVariable<?>[] declaredByClass = getDeclaringClass().getTypeParameters();

     * execute all peer settings logic on the writer thread. This relies on the fact that the
     * writer task queue won't reorder tasks; otherwise settings could be applied in the opposite
     * order than received.
     */
    fun applyAndAckSettings(
      clearPrevious: Boolean,
      settings: Settings,
    ) {
      var delta: Long
      var streamsToNotify: Array<Http2Stream>?