for details.

    The summary is that it ignores one file in favor of the other.
    util.concurrent, like nearly all our packages, has two .gwt.xml files: one
    for prod and one for tests. However, unlike our other packages, as of this
    writing it has test supersource but no prod supersource.

    GWT happens to use the prod .gwt.xml, so it looks for no supersource for

    for details.

    The summary is that it ignores one file in favor of the other.
    util.concurrent, like nearly all our packages, has two .gwt.xml files: one
    for prod and one for tests. However, unlike our other packages, as of this
    writing it has test supersource but no prod supersource.

    GWT happens to use the prod .gwt.xml, so it looks for no supersource for

 * by other {@code CycleDetectingLockFactory} instances (except those with {@code Policy.DISABLED}).
 * A lock's behavior when a cycle is detected, however, is defined by the {@code Policy} of the
 * factory that created it. This allows detection of cycles across components while delegating
 * control over lock behavior to individual components.
 *
 * <p>Applications are encouraged to use a {@code CycleDetectingLockFactory} to create any locks for

    ImmutableSetMultimap.Builder<String, Integer> builder = new Builder<>();
    StringHolder holder = new StringHolder();
    holder.string = "one";
    Entry<String, Integer> entry =
        new AbstractMapEntry<String, Integer>() {
          @Override
          public String getKey() {
            return holder.string;
          }

          @Override
          public Integer getValue() {

    for details.

    The summary is that it ignores one file in favor of the other.
    util.concurrent, like nearly all our packages, has two .gwt.xml files: one
    for prod and one for tests. However, unlike our other packages, as of this
    writing it has test supersource but no prod supersource.

    GWT happens to use the prod .gwt.xml, so it looks for no supersource for

    accumulator.addAll(values);
    return accumulator.snapshot();
  }

  /**
   * Returns statistics over a dataset containing the given values.
   *
   * @param values a series of values, which will be converted to {@code double} values (this may
   *     cause loss of precision for longs of magnitude over 2^53 (slightly over 9e15))
   */
  public static Stats of(long... values) {

   * identical inputs: This sounds like it ought to be a problem here, since the goals of this class
   * include testing that {@code equals()} is reflexive and is tolerant of {@code null}. However,
   * there's no problem. The reason: {@link EqualsTester} tests {@code null} and identical inputs
   * directly against {@code equals()} rather than through the {@code Equivalence}.
   */

 * }
 * }
 *
 * @author Ben Yu
 * @since 12.0
 */
/*
 * A nullable bound would let users create a TypeParameter instance for a parameter with a nullable
 * bound. However, it would also let them create `new TypeParameter<@Nullable T>() {}`, which
 * wouldn't behave as users might expect. Additionally, it's not clear how the TypeToken API could

   *
   * <p>When passed a key that is present in the map, {@code asMap().get(Object)} has the same
   * behavior as {@link #get}, returning a live collection. When passed a key that is not present,
   * however, {@code asMap().get(Object)} returns {@code null} instead of an empty collection.
   *
   * <p>Though the method signature doesn't say so explicitly, the returned map has {@link
   * SortedSet} values.
   */
  @Override

    public T get() {
      // Another variant of Double Checked Locking.
      //
      // We use two volatile reads. We could reduce this to one by
      // putting our fields into a holder class, but (at least on x86)
      // the extra memory consumption and indirection are more
      // expensive than the extra volatile reads.
      long nanos = expirationNanos;
      long now = System.nanoTime();