builder.put("d", 2);
    builder.put("a", 5);
    builder.orderKeysBy(
        new Ordering<String>() {
          @Override
          public int compare(String left, String right) {
            return left.length() - right.length();
          }
        });
    builder.put("cc", 4);
    builder.put("a", 2);
    builder.put("bb", 6);
    ImmutableSetMultimap<String, Integer> multimap = builder.build();

  int hashCode();

  /**
   * Returns a readable string representation of this range set. For example, if this {@code
   * RangeSet} consisted of {@code Range.closed(1, 3)} and {@code Range.greaterThan(4)}, this might
   * return {@code " [1..3](4..+∞)}"}.
   */
  @Override
  String toString();

    return new SingletonImmutableSet<>(element);
  }

  /*
   * TODO: b/315526394 - Skip the Builder entirely for the of(...) methods, since we don't need to
   * worry that we might trigger the fallback to the JDK-backed implementation? (The varargs one
   * _could_, so we could keep it as it is. Or we could convince ourselves that hash flooding is
   * unlikely in practice there, too.)
   */

  /**

         *
         * Sun bug 6665356 is an additional complication. Until OpenJDK 7, javac
         * doesn't recognize this kind of cast as unchecked cast. Neither does
         * Eclipse 3.4. Right now, this suppression is mostly unnecessary.
         */
        @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
        MultiExceptionListIterator multiExceptionListIterator =
            (MultiExceptionListIterator) reference;

    // then we know it must have given a pending toString value earlier. If not, then the future
    // completed after the timeout expired, and the message might be success.
    if (isDone()) {
      throw new TimeoutException(message + " but future completed as timeout expired");
    }
    throw new TimeoutException(message + " for " + futureToString);
  }

  /**

  public static final Integer four = 4;
  public static final Integer five = 5;
  public static final Integer six = 6;
  public static final Integer seven = 7;
  public static final Integer eight = 8;
  public static final Integer nine = 9;
  public static final Integer m1 = -1;
  public static final Integer m2 = -2;
  public static final Integer m3 = -3;
  public static final Integer m4 = -4;

     * Even though it's weird to pass a defaultValue that is null, some callers do so. Those who
     * pass a literal "null" should probably just use `get`, but I would expect other callers to
     * pass an expression that *might* be null. This could happen with:
     *
     * - a `getFooOrDefault(@CheckForNull Foo defaultValue)` method that returns
     *   `map.getOrDefault(FOO_KEY, defaultValue)`
     *

        rnd.nextBytes(left);
        byte[] right = left.clone();
        assertThat(comparator.compare(left, right)).isEqualTo(0);
        int i = rnd.nextInt(left.length);
        left[i] ^= (byte) (1 + rnd.nextInt(255));
        assertThat(comparator.compare(left, right)).isNotEqualTo(0);
        assertThat(UnsignedBytes.compare(left[i], right[i]) > 0)
            .isEqualTo(comparator.compare(left, right) > 0);
      }
    }
  }

     * make sure they see a consistent snapshot: If modCounts change during a traversal of segments
     * loading size or checking containsValue, then we might have an inconsistent view of state so
     * (usually) must retry.
     */
    int modCount;

    /**
     * The table is expanded when its size exceeds this threshold. (The value of this field is

            return secondary;
          }
        };
    ListenableFuture<Bar> f2 = transformAsync(f1, function, directExecutor());
    f1.cancel(true);
    assertTrue(f2.isCancelled());
    /*
     * We might like to propagate interruption, too, but it's not clear that it matters. For now, we
     * test for the behavior that we have today.
     */
    assertFalse(((AbstractFuture<?>) f2).wasInterrupted());
  }

  /*