*       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

   *   <li>If the constructor or factory method used to construct instance takes a parameter that
   *       {@link AbstractPackageSanityTests} doesn't know how to construct, the test will fail.
   *   <li>If there is no visible constructor or visible static factory method declared by {@code
   *       C}, instance methods are skipped for nulls test.

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

/**
 * An executor service which forwards all its method calls to another executor service. Subclasses
 * should override one or more methods to modify the behavior of the backing executor service as
 * desired per the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decorator_pattern">decorator pattern</a>.
 *
 * <p><b>{@code default} method warning:</b> This class does <i>not</i> forward calls to {@code

 * provided {@code standardOffer} method.
 *
 * <p><b>{@code default} method warning:</b> This class does <i>not</i> forward calls to {@code
 * default} methods. Instead, it inherits their default implementations. When those implementations
 * invoke methods, they invoke methods on the {@code ForwardingQueue}.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods are not guaranteed to be thread-safe, even when all of the

        fileInputStream.mark(readlimit);
    }

    /**
     * Tests if this input stream supports the mark and reset methods.
     * This method delegates to {@link FileInputStream#markSupported()}.
     *
     * @return {@code true} if this stream type supports the mark and reset method; {@code false} otherwise
     */
    @Override
    public boolean markSupported() {
        return fileInputStream.markSupported();