value: String,
) = apply {
  headersCheckName(name)
  headersCheckValue(value, name)
  removeAll(name)
  commonAddLenient(name, value)
}

/** Equivalent to `build().get(name)`, but potentially faster. */
internal fun Headers.Builder.commonGet(name: String): String? {
  for (i in namesAndValues.size - 2 downTo 0 step 2) {
    if (name.equals(namesAndValues[i], ignoreCase = true)) {
      return namesAndValues[i + 1]

        // Set-based lookup should be significantly faster
        // Note: This is a rough check - exact performance depends on JVM, hardware, etc.
        // We expect Set lookup to be at least as fast as array lookup for large datasets
        assertTrue("Set-based lookup should be faster or comparable to array-based lookup for large datasets",

   * moved to index "distance", and the element at index {@code i} ends up at index {@code (distance
   * + i) mod array.length}. This is equivalent to {@code Collections.rotate(Floats.asList(array),
   * distance)}, but is considerably faster and avoids allocation and garbage collection.
   *
   * <p>The provided "distance" may be negative, which will rotate left.
   *
   * @since 32.0.0
   */
  public static void rotate(float[] array, int distance) {

   *
   * TODO(b/218700094): Ideally, get this to pass under Android. Failing that, convince ourselves
   * that the test isn't exposing a real problem with InterruptibleTask, one that could matter in
   * prod.
   */
  @AndroidIncompatible
  public void testInterruptIsSlow() throws Exception {
    CountDownLatch isInterruptibleRegistered = new CountDownLatch(1);

   *
   * TODO(b/218700094): Ideally, get this to pass under Android. Failing that, convince ourselves
   * that the test isn't exposing a real problem with InterruptibleTask, one that could matter in
   * prod.
   */
  @AndroidIncompatible
  public void testInterruptIsSlow() throws Exception {
    CountDownLatch isInterruptibleRegistered = new CountDownLatch(1);

 * number of streams, dynamically configured with `SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS`. A connection
 * currently carrying zero streams is an idle stream. We keep it alive because reusing an existing
 * connection is typically faster than establishing a new one.
 *
 * When a single logical call requires multiple streams due to redirects or authorization
 * challenges, we prefer to use the same physical connection for all streams in the sequence. There

      // test a random slice() of the ByteSource
      Random random = new Random();
      byte[] expected = factory.getExpected(bytes);
      // if expected.length == 0, off has to be 0 but length doesn't matter--result will be empty
      int off = expected.length == 0 ? 0 : random.nextInt(expected.length);
      int len = expected.length == 0 ? 4 : random.nextInt(expected.length - off);

   * moved to index "distance", and the element at index {@code i} ends up at index {@code (distance
   * + i) mod array.length}. This is equivalent to {@code Collections.rotate(Bytes.asList(array),
   * distance)}, but is somewhat faster.
   *
   * <p>The provided "distance" may be negative, which will rotate left.
   *
   * @since 32.0.0
   */
  public static void rotate(byte[] array, int distance) {

import java.util.concurrent.Executor;
import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable;

/** Implementations of {@code Futures.catching*}. */
@GwtCompatible
// Whenever both tests are cheap and functional, it's faster to use &, | instead of &&, ||
@SuppressWarnings("ShortCircuitBoolean")
abstract class AbstractCatchingFuture<
        V extends @Nullable Object, X extends Throwable, F, T extends @Nullable Object>

   * moved to index "distance", and the element at index {@code i} ends up at index {@code (distance
   * + i) mod array.length}. This is equivalent to {@code Collections.rotate(Bytes.asList(array),
   * distance)}, but is considerably faster and avoids allocation and garbage collection.
   *
   * <p>The provided "distance" may be negative, which will rotate left.
   *
   * @since 32.0.0
   */
  public static void rotate(double[] array, int distance) {