private final char[] unknown = new char[] {'?'};

          @Override
          protected char[] escapeUnsafe(int c) {
            return unknown;
          }
        };
    EscaperAsserts.assertBasic(replacingEscaper);

    // Replacements are applied first regardless of whether the character is in
    // the safe range or not ('&' is a safe char while '\t' and '\n' are not).
    assertEquals(

  SortedMap<K, V> create(Object... elements);

  /**
   * Returns an entry with a key less than the keys of the {@link #samples()} and less than the key
   * of {@link #belowSamplesGreater()}.
   */
  Entry<K, V> belowSamplesLesser();

  /**
   * Returns an entry with a key less than the keys of the {@link #samples()} but greater than the
   * key of {@link #belowSamplesLesser()}.
   */
  Entry<K, V> belowSamplesGreater();

   */
  public static char toLowerCase(char c) {
    return isUpperCase(c) ? (char) (c ^ CASE_MASK) : c;
  }

  /**
   * Returns a copy of the input string in which all {@linkplain #isLowerCase(char) lowercase ASCII
   * characters} have been converted to uppercase. All other characters are copied without
   * modification.
   */
  public static String toUpperCase(String string) {
    int length = string.length();

   * going and grow as needed.
   */
  private static final ThreadLocal<char[]> DEST_TL =
      new ThreadLocal<char[]>() {
        @Override
        protected char[] initialValue() {
          return new char[1024];
        }
      };

      int h1 = seed;
      int i = 0;
      int len = 0;

      // This loop optimizes for pure ASCII.
      while (i + 4 <= utf16Length) {
        char c0 = input.charAt(i);
        char c1 = input.charAt(i + 1);
        char c2 = input.charAt(i + 2);
        char c3 = input.charAt(i + 3);
        if (c0 < 0x80 && c1 < 0x80 && c2 < 0x80 && c3 < 0x80) {
          int k1 = c0 | (c1 << 8) | (c2 << 16) | (c3 << 24);

 * that you implement a {@link Funnel}{@code <T>} to specify how to "feed" data from that object
 * into the function. (See {@linkplain Hasher#putObject an example} of this.)
 *
 * <p><b>Compatibility note:</b> Throughout this API, multibyte values are always interpreted in
 * <i>little-endian</i> order. That is, hashing the byte array {@code {0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04}} is

  ASSERT_EQ(TF_OK, TF_GetCode(s_)) << TF_Message(s_);
  EXPECT_TF_META("v", -1, TF_ATTR_STRING, 5);
  std::unique_ptr<char[]> value(new char[5]);

  TF_OperationGetAttrString(oper, "v", value.get(), 5, s_);
  EXPECT_EQ(TF_OK, TF_GetCode(s_)) << TF_Message(s_);
  EXPECT_EQ("bunny", string(static_cast<const char*>(value.get()), 5));
}

TEST_F(CApiAttributesTest, StringList) {

      }
    },
    // It really seems like this should be faster than TO_BYTE_ARRAY_NEW_STRING.  But it just isn't
    // my best guess is that the jdk authors have spent more time optimizing that callpath than this
    // one. (StringCoding$StringDecoder vs. StreamDecoder).  StringCoding has a ton of special cases
    // theoretically we could duplicate all that logic here to try to beat 'new String' or at least
    // come close.

      }
    },
    // It really seems like this should be faster than TO_BYTE_ARRAY_NEW_STRING.  But it just isn't
    // my best guess is that the jdk authors have spent more time optimizing that callpath than this
    // one. (StringCoding$StringDecoder vs. StreamDecoder).  StringCoding has a ton of special cases
    // theoretically we could duplicate all that logic here to try to beat 'new String' or at least
    // come close.

     * https://stackoverflow.com/a/35754308/28465
     *
     * In that explanation's notation, our `overlap` check would be `x1 < y2 && y1 < x2`. We've
     * flipped one part of the check so that we're using "less than" in both cases (rather than a
     * mix of "less than" and "greater than"). We've also switched to "strictly less than" rather
     * than "less than or equal to" because of *handwave* the difference between "endpoints of