* pass null inputs to LegacyConverter, and it can violate the contract of Converter.
   *
   * TODO(cpovirk): Could this be simplified if we modified implementations of LegacyConverter to
   * override methods (probably called "unsafeDoForward" and "unsafeDoBackward") with the same
   * signatures as the methods below, rather than overriding the same doForward and doBackward
   * methods as implementations of normal converters do?
   *

        if (result < 0) {
          // Overflow (or one or more sources that returned a negative size, but all bets are off in
          // that case)
          // Can't represent anything higher, and realistically there probably isn't anything that
          // can actually be done anyway with the supposed 8+ exbibytes of data the source is
          // claiming to have if we get here, so just stop.
          return Optional.of(Long.MAX_VALUE);

      Class<?> cls;
      try {
        cls = classInfo.load();
      } catch (NoClassDefFoundError e) {
        // In case there were linking problems, this is probably not a class we care to test anyway.
        logger.log(Level.SEVERE, "Cannot load class " + classInfo + ", skipping...", e);
        continue;
      }
      if (!cls.isInterface()) {
        classes.add(cls);

        .addEqualityGroup(ImmutableLongArray.of(1, 3))
        .addEqualityGroup(ImmutableLongArray.of(1, 2, 3))
        .testEquals();
  }

  /**
   * This is probably a weird and hacky way to test what we're really trying to test, but hey, it
   * caught a bug.
   */
  public void testTrimmed() {
    ImmutableLongArray iia = ImmutableLongArray.of(0, 1, 3);

          source.skip(remainingByteCount)
          closeLater(ErrorCode.FLOW_CONTROL_ERROR)
          return
        }

        // Discard data received after the stream is finished. It's probably a benign race.
        if (finished) {
          source.skip(remainingByteCount)
          return
        }

        // Fill the receive buffer without holding any locks.

   * AnnotatedElement}, which {@code TypeVariable} began to extend only in Java 8. Those methods
   * refer only to types present under Android, so we could implement them in {@code
   * TypeVariableImpl} today. (We could probably then make {@code TypeVariableImpl} implement {@code
   * AnnotatedElement} so that we get partial compile-time checking.)
   *
   * <p>This workaround should be removed at a distant future time when <a

   *
   * 1. b/192354773 in our checker affects toArray declarations.
   *
   * 2. `other[size] = null` is unsound. We could "fix" this by requiring callers to pass in an
   * array with a nullable element type. But probably they usually want an array with a non-nullable
   * type. That said, we could *accept* a `@Nullable T[]` (which, given that we treat arrays as

  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_negative() {
    int dim1 = 1 << 16;
    int dim2 = 1 << 15;
    assertThat(dim1 * dim2).isLessThan(0);
    testConcatOverflow(dim1, dim2);
  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_nonNegative() {

  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_negative() {
    int dim1 = 1 << 16;
    int dim2 = 1 << 15;
    assertThat(dim1 * dim2).isLessThan(0);
    testConcatOverflow(dim1, dim2);
  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_nonNegative() {

  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_negative() {
    int dim1 = 1 << 16;
    int dim2 = 1 << 15;
    assertThat(dim1 * dim2).isLessThan(0);
    testConcatOverflow(dim1, dim2);
  }

  @GwtIncompatible // different overflow behavior; could probably be made to work by using ~~
  public void testConcat_overflow_nonNegative() {