* We wish to test whether or not x <= (sqrtFloor + 0.5)^2 = halfSquare + 0.25. Since both x
         * and halfSquare are integers, this is equivalent to testing whether or not x <=
         * halfSquare. (We have to deal with overflow, though.)
         *
         * If we treat halfSquare as an unsigned long, we know that
         *            sqrtFloor^2 <= x < (sqrtFloor + 1)^2

feet, they seemed to be almost out of sight, they were getting so
far off).  `Oh, my poor little feet, I wonder who will put on
your shoes and stockings for you now, dears?  I'm sure _I_ shan't
be able!  I shall be a great deal too far off to trouble myself
about you:  you must manage the best way you can; --but I must be
kind to them,' thought Alice, `or perhaps they won't walk the
way I want to go!  Let me see:  I'll give them a new pair of

 * the methods of the delegate. For example, overriding {@link #add(Object, int)} alone <b>will
 * not</b> change the behavior of {@link #add(Object)}, which can lead to unexpected behavior. In
 * this case, you should override {@code add(Object)} as well, either providing your own
 * implementation, or delegating to the provided {@code standardAdd} method.
 *

     * lying about the fields below on the grounds that we always initialize them just after the
     * constructor -- an example of the kind of lying that our hypothetical bytecode rewriter would
     * already have to deal with, thanks to DI frameworks that perform field and method injection,
     * frameworks like Android that define post-construct hooks like Activity.onCreate, etc.
     */

   * does not alter the value returned by {@code getValue()}, though a subsequent {@code setValue()}
   * call won't update the multimap but will lead to a revised value being returned by {@code
   * getValue()}.
   */
  @Override
  public List<Entry<K, V>> entries() {
    return (List<Entry<K, V>>) super.entries();
  }

  @Override

    Object key = new Object();
    assertNotNull(cache.getUnchecked(key));

    CacheTesting.simulateValueReclamation(cache, key);

    // this blocks if computation can't deal with partially-collected values
    assertNotNull(cache.getUnchecked(key));
    assertEquals(1, cache.size());
    assertEquals(2, countingLoader.getCount());

    CacheTesting.simulateValueReclamation(cache, key);

   *
   * <p><b>Note:</b> The current implementation eagerly allocates storage for {@code size} elements.
   * As a consequence, passing values like {@code Integer.MAX_VALUE} can lead to {@link
   * OutOfMemoryError}.
   *
   * <p><b>Note:</b> if {@code iterable} is a {@link List}, use {@link Lists#partition(List, int)}
   * instead.
   *

   *
   * if (guardExpression) {
   *    throw new BadException(badMsg(...));
   * }
   *
   * The alternative natural refactorings into void or Exception-returning methods are much slower.
   * This is a big deal - we're talking factors of 2-8 in microbenchmarks, not just 10-20%. (This is
   * a hotspot optimizer bug, which should be fixed, but that's a separate, big project).
   *

   * permits? As explained above, there is no unique answer. If we are primarily interested to deal
   * with underutilization, then we want stored permits to be given out /faster/ than fresh ones,
   * because underutilization = free resources for the taking. If we are primarily interested to
   * deal with overflow, then stored permits could be given out /slower/ than fresh ones. Thus, we

        Did you *actually* encounter the need for this enhancement in a real-world scenario, or does
        it just seem like a sensible behavior for the feature to have?


        Before we make significant changes to existing features in Guava, we really want to be sure
        that it's for a use case that actually comes up in the real world. We want to hear the