}
  }

  public void testNullBounds() {
    // NullBounds has methods whose parameters are type variables that have
    // "extends @Nullable Object" as a bound. This test ensures that NullPointerTester considers
    // those parameters to be @Nullable, so it won't call the methods.
    NullBounds<?, ?, ?> nullBounds = new NullBounds<>();
    new NullPointerTester().testAllPublicInstanceMethods(nullBounds);

     * contrast to the "V?" type that we're using. As a result, Kotlin sees a conflict between the
     * nullness annotations in ImmutableMap and those in its own Map type. In response, it considers
     * the parameter and return type both to be platform types. As a result, Kotlin permits calls
     * that can lead to NullPointerException. That's unfortunate. But hopefully most Kotlin callers

     * contrast to the "V?" type that we're using. As a result, Kotlin sees a conflict between the
     * nullness annotations in ImmutableMap and those in its own Map type. In response, it considers
     * the parameter and return type both to be platform types. As a result, Kotlin permits calls
     * that can lead to NullPointerException. That's unfortunate. But hopefully most Kotlin callers

 * model to address problems that the others don't.
 *
 * ### Different URLs should be different
 *
 * Although they have different content, `java.net.URL` considers the following two URLs
 * equal, and the [equals()][Object.equals] method between them returns true:
 *
 *  * https://example.net/
 *
 *  * https://example.com/
 *

# Define this here and not in the main mkdocs.yml file because that one is auto
# updated and written, and the script would remove the env var
INHERIT: !ENV [INSIDERS_FILE, '../en/mkdocs.no-insiders.yml']
markdown_extensions:
  pymdownx.highlight:

    // any values in that range. To see why, consider the case where:
    // safeMin <= {hi,lo} <= safeMax
    // where {hi,lo} are characters forming a surrogate pair such that:
    // codePointOf(hi, lo) > safeMax
    // which would result in the surrogate pair being (wrongly) considered safe.
    // If we clip the safe range used during the per-character tests so it is

    // any values in that range. To see why, consider the case where:
    // safeMin <= {hi,lo} <= safeMax
    // where {hi,lo} are characters forming a surrogate pair such that:
    // codePointOf(hi, lo) > safeMax
    // which would result in the surrogate pair being (wrongly) considered safe.
    // If we clip the safe range used during the per-character tests so it is

Sebastián Ramírez <******@****.***> 1723646007 -0500

 * single character '{@code \}{@code u1000}' will require approximately 16K of memory. If you need
 * to create multiple escaper instances that have the same character replacement mapping consider
 * using {@link ArrayBasedEscaperMap}.
 *
 * @author Sven Mawson
 * @author David Beaumont
 * @since 15.0
 */
@GwtCompatible
public abstract class ArrayBasedCharEscaper extends CharEscaper {

Sebastián Ramírez <******@****.***> 1687788343 +0200