return new TypeToken<T[]>() {}.where(new TypeParameter<T>() {}, componentType);
  }

  public <T> void testNulls() {
    new NullPointerTester().testAllPublicStaticMethods(TypeToken.class);
    new NullPointerTester()
        .setDefault(TypeParameter.class, new TypeParameter<T>() {})
        .testAllPublicInstanceMethods(TypeToken.of(String.class));
  }

   * @throws IllegalArgumentException if {@code occurrences} is negative
   */
  /*
   * TODO(cpovirk): remove and removeExactly currently accept null inputs only
   * if occurrences == 0. This satisfies both NullPointerTester and
   * CollectionRemoveTester.testRemove_nullAllowed, but it's not clear that it's
   * a good policy, especially because, in order for the test to pass, the

        assertEquals(0, map.size());
        assertNull(segment.valueReferenceQueue.poll());
      }
    }
  }

  public void testNullParameters() throws Exception {
    NullPointerTester tester = new NullPointerTester();
    tester.testAllPublicInstanceMethods(makeLocalCache(createCacheBuilder()));
    CacheLoader<Object, Object> loader = identityLoader();

        assertEquals(0, map.size());
        assertNull(segment.valueReferenceQueue.poll());
      }
    }
  }

  public void testNullParameters() throws Exception {
    NullPointerTester tester = new NullPointerTester();
    tester.testAllPublicInstanceMethods(makeLocalCache(createCacheBuilder()));
    CacheLoader<Object, Object> loader = identityLoader();

    return new TypeToken<T[]>() {}.where(new TypeParameter<T>() {}, componentType);
  }

  public <T> void testNulls() {
    new NullPointerTester().testAllPublicStaticMethods(TypeToken.class);
    new NullPointerTester()
        .setDefault(TypeParameter.class, new TypeParameter<T>() {})
        .testAllPublicInstanceMethods(TypeToken.of(String.class));
  }

     * implement Function<A, B>, as discussed in a class-level comment), it would make some sense to
     * perform runtime null checks on the input and output. (That would also make NullPointerTester
     * happy!) However, since we didn't do that for many years, we're not about to start now.
     * (Runtime checks could be particularly bad for users of LegacyConverter.)
     *