*/
  @Override
  public void close() throws IOException {
    Throwable throwable = thrown;

    // close closeables in LIFO order
    while (!stack.isEmpty()) {
      Closeable closeable = stack.removeFirst();
      try {
        closeable.close();
      } catch (Throwable e) {
        if (throwable == null) {
          throwable = e;
        } else {

 *
 * <pre>{@code
 * // Helper function keeps victim stack-unreachable.
 * private WeakReference<Foo> fooWeakRef() {
 *   Foo x = ....;
 *   WeakReference<Foo> weakRef = new WeakReference<>(x);
 *   // ... use x ...
 *   x = null;  // Hint to the JIT that x is stack-unreachable
 *   return weakRef;
 * }
 * public void testFooLeak() {
 *   GcFinalization.awaitClear(fooWeakRef());

                return acl;
              }
            };
        return () -> attribute;
      } catch (IOException e) {
        // We throw a new exception each time so that the stack trace is right.
        return () -> {
          throw new IOException("Could not find user", e);
        };
      }
    }

    private static String getUsername() {
      /*

 *
 * <pre>{@code
 * // Helper function keeps victim stack-unreachable.
 * private WeakReference<Foo> fooWeakRef() {
 *   Foo x = ....;
 *   WeakReference<Foo> weakRef = new WeakReference<>(x);
 *   // ... use x ...
 *   x = null;  // Hint to the JIT that x is stack-unreachable
 *   return weakRef;
 * }
 * public void testFooLeak() {
 *   GcFinalization.awaitClear(fooWeakRef());

      setFutureSuccess.set(false);
      cancellationSuccess.set(false);
      finalResults.clear();
    }
    executor.shutdown();
  }

  // In a previous implementation this would cause a stack overflow after ~2000 futures chained
  // together.  Now it should only be limited by available memory (and time)
  public void testSetFuture_stackOverflow() {
    SettableFuture<String> orig = SettableFuture.create();

                    }
                  },
                  service);
        } else if (i % DIRECT_EXECUTIONS_PER_THREAD == DIRECT_EXECUTIONS_PER_THREAD - 1) {
          // When at max depth, record stack trace depth
          lengthChecks.add(
              serializer.submit(
                  new Callable<Integer>() {
                    @Override
                    public Integer call() {

                    }
                  },
                  service);
        } else if (i % DIRECT_EXECUTIONS_PER_THREAD == DIRECT_EXECUTIONS_PER_THREAD - 1) {
          // When at max depth, record stack trace depth
          lengthChecks.add(
              serializer.submit(
                  new Callable<Integer>() {
                    @Override
                    public Integer call() {

      setFutureSuccess.set(false);
      cancellationSuccess.set(false);
      finalResults.clear();
    }
    executor.shutdown();
  }

  // In a previous implementation this would cause a stack overflow after ~2000 futures chained
  // together.  Now it should only be limited by available memory (and time)
  public void testSetFuture_stackOverflow() {
    SettableFuture<String> orig = SettableFuture.create();

          ImmutableList.of(1, 2),
          ImmutableList.of(3, 5),
          ImmutableList.of(2, 4),
          ImmutableList.of(1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9));

  /*
   * We have a whole series of abstract test classes that "stack", so e.g. the tests for filtered
   * NavigableSets inherit the tests for filtered Iterables, Collections, Sets, and SortedSets. The
   * actual implementation tests are further down.
   */

   *   <li>If many such tasks are chained together (such as with {@code
   *       future.transform(...).transform(...).transform(...)....}), they may overflow the stack.
   *       (In simple cases, callers can avoid this by registering all tasks with the same {@link
   *       MoreExecutors#newSequentialExecutor} wrapper around {@code directExecutor()}. More