* {@link Collections#singleton(Object)} and <a
 * href="https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/docs/api/java/util/Set.html#immutable">{@code Set.of}</a>,
 * we recommend using <i>these</i> classes instead for this reason (as well as for consistency).
 *
 * <h4>Creation</h4>
 *
 * <p>Except for logically "abstract" types like {@code ImmutableCollection} itself, each {@code

  public final E remove(int index) {
    throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
  }

  /**
   * Returns this list instance.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   * @deprecated There is no reason to use this; it always returns {@code this}.
   */
  @InlineMe(replacement = "this")
  @Deprecated
  @Override
  public final ImmutableList<E> asList() {
    return this;
  }

  @Override

 * Generally speaking, this class reduces object allocation and memory consumption at the price of
 * moderately increased constant factors of CPU. Only use this class when there is a specific reason
 * to prioritize memory over CPU.
 *
 * @author Louis Wasserman
 * @author Jon Noack
 */
@GwtIncompatible // not worth using in GWT for now
@ElementTypesAreNonnullByDefault

    }
    return recordsTime ? Ticker.systemTicker() : NULL_TICKER;
  }

  /**
   * Specifies a listener instance that caches should notify each time an entry is removed for any
   * {@linkplain RemovalCause reason}. Each cache created by this builder will invoke this listener
   * as part of the routine maintenance described in the class documentation above.
   *

         * guarantee behavior in that case, anyway, and the current behavior is likely undesirable.
         * So that's either a reason to feel free to change it or a reason to not bother thinking
         * further about this.
         */
        V rightValue = uncheckedCastNullableTToT(onlyOnRight.remove(leftKey));

e&siek?zu&b?kihc???o&gukihc?h&ak?ot?ukihc??j&ono?ukihc??kayim?nihsukihc?to?uhc??u&fiazad?gnihs?stoyot????zihs!.&a&bmetog?d&amihs?eijuf?ihsoy?omihs??kouzihs?mihsim?ra&biah?honikam??tawi?wa&g&ekak?ukik??kijuf??yimonijuf??i&a&ra?sok??hcamirom?juf?kaz&eamo?ustam??ma&nnak?ta??nukonuzi?orukuf??nohenawak?o&nosus?ti??u&stamamah?z&a&mun?wak??i!ay?i&hs&agih?in??manim??mihs????????m&a&tias!.&a&d&ihsoy?ot?usah??k&a&dih?sa??o&arihs?s???m&a&tias?y&as?o&rom?tah??ustamihsagih???i&hsagurust?jawak??uri??ni?wa&g&e...

  }

  /**
   * Attempts to cancel execution of this step. This attempt will fail if the step has already
   * completed, has already been cancelled, or could not be cancelled for some other reason. If
   * successful, and this step has not started when {@code cancel} is called, this step should never
   * run.
   *
   * <p>If successful, causes the objects captured by this step (if already started) and its input

   * not fail a test when an exception is thrown from one of its {@link TearDown} instances, but
   * this is subject to change. Also, {@code junit4.TearDownTestCase} will.
   *
   * @throws Exception for any reason. {@code TearDownTestCase} ensures that any exception thrown
   *     will not interfere with other TearDown operations.
   */
  void tearDown() throws Exception;

  }

  // Wrapper of EnumMultiset factory methods, because we need to skip create(Class).
  // create(Enum1.class) is equal to create(Enum2.class) but testEquals() expects otherwise.
  // For the same reason, we need to skip create(Iterable, Class).
  private static class EnumMultisetFactory {
    public static <E extends Enum<E>> EnumMultiset<E> create(Iterable<E> elements) {
      return EnumMultiset.create(elements);
    }

              try {
                /*
                 * Threads from our private pool are never interrupted. Threads from a
                 * user-supplied executor might be, but... what can we do? This is another reason
                 * to return a proper ListenableFuture instead of using listenInPoolThread.
                 */
                getUninterruptibly(delegate);
              } catch (Throwable t) {