new AbstractFuture<Object>() {
          @Override
          public String pendingToString() {
            return "cause=[Because this test isn't done]";
          }
        };
    assertThat(testFuture.toString())
        .matches(
            "[^\\[]+\\[status=PENDING, info=\\[cause=\\[Because this test isn't done\\]\\]\\]");
    TimeoutException e = assertThrows(TimeoutException.class, () -> testFuture.get(1, NANOSECONDS));

   * lost, because the signal may be sent to a condition whose sole waiter has just been
   * interrupted.
   *
   * Imagine a monitor with multiple guards. A thread enters the monitor, satisfies all the guards,
   * and leaves, calling signalNextWaiter. With traditional locks and conditions, all the conditions

   * have the provided key, an empty collection is returned.
   *
   * <p>Changes to the returned collection will update the underlying multimap, and vice versa.
   *
   * <p>Because a {@code SortedSetMultimap} has unique sorted values for a given key, this method
   * returns a {@link SortedSet}, instead of the {@link java.util.Collection} specified in the
   * {@link Multimap} interface.
   */
  @Override

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

   * <pre>
   * collection.add(existingElement);
   * expectAdded(existingElement);</pre>
   *
   * <p>In this case, {@code collection} was not modified as a result of the {@code add()} call, and
   * the test will fail because the number of occurrences of {@code existingElement} is unchanged.
   *
   * @param elements expected additional contents of {@link #container}
   */
  protected final void expectAdded(E... elements) {

 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code
 *       ImmutableList.get} returns {@code E}, but that value is never {@code null}. (Accordingly,

 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code
 *       ImmutableList.get} returns {@code E}, but that value is never {@code null}. (Accordingly,

 * family. <b>Avoid</b> creating a mock or stub {@code Future}. Mock and stub implementations are
 * fragile because they assume that only certain methods will be called and because they often
 * implement subtleties of the API improperly.
 *
 * <p><b>Custom implementation</b>: Avoid implementing {@code ListenableFuture} from scratch. If you

 * family. <b>Avoid</b> creating a mock or stub {@code Future}. Mock and stub implementations are
 * fragile because they assume that only certain methods will be called and because they often
 * implement subtleties of the API improperly.
 *
 * <p><b>Custom implementation</b>: Avoid implementing {@code ListenableFuture} from scratch. If you

        }
      }
      return true;
    }
  },
  /**
   * This strategy uses all 128 bits of {@link Hashing#murmur3_128} when hashing. It looks different
   * from the implementation in MURMUR128_MITZ_32 because we're avoiding the multiplication in the
   * loop and doing a (much simpler) += hash2. We're also changing the index to a positive number by
   * AND'ing with Long.MAX_VALUE instead of flipping the bits.
   */