: new ArrayTable<R, C, V>(table);
  }

  private final ImmutableList<R> rowList;
  private final ImmutableList<C> columnList;

  // TODO(jlevy): Add getters returning rowKeyToIndex and columnKeyToIndex?
  private final ImmutableMap<R, Integer> rowKeyToIndex;
  private final ImmutableMap<C, Integer> columnKeyToIndex;
  private final @Nullable V[][] array;

### ¿Es la concurrencia mejor que el paralelismo? { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

¡No! Esa no es la moraleja de la historia.

   * serialize the copy. Other methods similar to this do not implement serialization at all for
   * this reason.
   *
   * <p><b>Java 8+ users:</b> many use cases for this method are better addressed by {@link
   * java.util.stream.Stream#map}. This method is not being deprecated, but we gently encourage you
   * to migrate to streams.
   */

你可以同時利用並行性和平行性，進一步提升效能，這比大多數已測試的 NodeJS 框架都更快，並且與 Go 語言相當，而 Go 是一種更接近 C 的編譯語言（[感謝 Starlette](https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r17&hw=ph&test=query&l=zijmkf-1)）。

### 並行比平行更好嗎？ { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

不是的！這不是故事的本意。

並行與平行不同。並行在某些 **特定** 的需要大量等待的情境下表現更好。正因如此，並行在 Web 應用程式開發中通常比平行更有優勢。但並不是所有情境都如此。

因此，為了平衡報導，想像下面這個短故事

> 你需要打掃一間又大又髒的房子。

*是的，這就是全部的故事。*

---

你可以同时拥有并行性和异步性，你可以获得比大多数经过测试的 NodeJS 框架更高的性能，并且与 Go 不相上下， Go 是一种更接近于 C 的编译语言（[全部归功于 Starlette](https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r17&hw=ph&test=query&l=zijmkf-1)）。

### 并发比并行好吗？ { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

不！这不是故事的本意。

并发不同于并行。而是在需要大量等待的特定场景下效果更好。因此，在 Web 应用程序开发中，它通常比并行要好得多，但这并不意味着全部。

因此，为了平衡这一点，想象一下下面的短篇故事：

> 你必须打扫一个又大又脏的房子。

*是的，这就是完整的故事。*

---

get its source.  For example, if your program is a web application, its
interface could display a "Source" link that leads users to an archive
of the code.  There are many ways you could offer source, and different
solutions will be better for different programs; see section 13 for the
specific requirements.

  You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary.

   * structure (to make it possible to throw ConcurrentModificationException in the iterator). Note
   * that we choose not to make this volatile, so we do less of a "best effort" to track such
   * errors, for better performance.
   *
   * <p>For a new instance, where the arrays above have not yet been allocated, the value of {@code
   * metadata} is the size that the arrays should be allocated with. Once the arrays have been

   *
   * <p>If {@code expectedSize} is exactly the number of elements added to the builder before {@link
   * Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized {@link
   * #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,
   * but not exactly, the number of elements added to the builder.

   * {@link TreeSet} or the {@link Map#keySet} of an {@code IdentityHashMap}.
   *
   * <p><b>Note:</b> The returned view performs slightly better when {@code set1} is the smaller of
   * the two sets. If you have reason to believe one of your sets will generally be smaller than the
   * other, pass it first. Unfortunately, since this method sets the generic type of the returned

	default:
		p.errorf("register list not supported on this architecture")
	}
}

func (p *Parser) registerListX86(a *obj.Addr) {
	// Accept only [RegA-RegB] syntax.
	// Don't use p.get() to provide better error messages.

	loName := p.next().String()
	lo, ok := p.arch.Register[loName]
	if !ok {
		if loName == "EOF" {
			p.errorf("register list: expected ']', found EOF")
		} else {