* example, {@code [] < [1] < [1, 2] < [2]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(int[], int[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<int[]> lexicographicalComparator() {

then <i>A</i> is synchronized before <i>B</i>.
All the atomic operations executed in a program behave as though executed
in some sequentially consistent order.
</p>

<p>
The preceding definition has the same semantics as C++’s sequentially consistent atomics
and Java’s <code>volatile</code> variables.
</p>

<h3 id="finalizer">Finalizers</h3>

<p>

        throw IOException("unexpected journal line: $line")
      }
    }
  }

  /**
   * Computes the initial size and collects garbage as a part of opening the cache. Dirty entries
   * are assumed to be inconsistent and will be deleted.
   */
  @Throws(IOException::class)
  private fun processJournal() {
    fileSystem.deleteIfExists(journalFileTmp)
    val i = lruEntries.values.iterator()
    while (i.hasNext()) {

 * detailed at {@link ImmutableCollection}.
 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> as with any sorted collection, you are strongly advised not to use a {@link
 * Comparator} or {@link Comparable} type whose comparison behavior is <i>inconsistent with
 * equals</i>. That is, {@code a.compareTo(b)} or {@code comparator.compare(a, b)} should equal zero
 * <i>if and only if</i> {@code a.equals(b)}. If this advice is not followed, the resulting

    /**
     * Number of updates that alter the size of the table. This is used during bulk-read methods to
     * make sure they see a consistent snapshot: If modCounts change during a traversal of segments
     * computing size or checking containsValue, then we might have an inconsistent view of state so
     * (usually) must retry.
     */
    int modCount;

    /**

   *
   * <p><b>Warning:</b> {@code predicate} must be <i>consistent with equals</i>, as documented at
   * {@link Predicate#apply}. Do not provide a predicate such as {@code
   * Predicates.instanceOf(ArrayList.class)}, which is inconsistent with equals. (See {@link
   * Iterables#filter(Iterable, Class)} for related functionality.)
   *
   * @since 14.0
   */

   *
   * <p><b>Warning:</b> {@code predicate} must be <i>consistent with equals</i>, as documented at
   * {@link Predicate#apply}. Do not provide a predicate such as {@code
   * Predicates.instanceOf(ArrayList.class)}, which is inconsistent with equals. (See {@link
   * Iterables#filter(Iterable, Class)} for related functionality.)
   *
   * @since 14.0
   */

   * example, {@code [] < [1L] < [1L, 2L] < [2L]}.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is inconsistent with {@link Object#equals(Object)} (since arrays
   * support only identity equality), but it is consistent with {@link Arrays#equals(long[],
   * long[])}.
   *
   * @since 2.0
   */
  public static Comparator<long[]> lexicographicalComparator() {

//   In C++ bool is a keyword while in C99 bool is a macro defined
//   in stdbool.h. It is possible for the two to be inconsistent.
//   For example, neither the C99 nor the C++11 standard force a byte
//   size on the bool type, so the macro defined in stdbool.h could
//   be inconsistent with the bool keyword in C++. Thus, the use
//   of stdbool.h is avoided and unsigned char is used instead.

			metaArr[index].ModTime = modTime
			metaArr[index].VersionID = versionID
			if !metaArr[index].InlineData() {
				// If the data is not inlined, we may end up incorrectly
				// inlining the data here, that leads to an inconsistent
				// situation where some objects are were not inlined
				// were now inlined, make sure to `nil` the Data such
				// that xl.meta is written as expected.
				metaArr[index].Data = nil
			}