* don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

 * Stats}, {@link PairedStatsAccumulator}, and {@link PairedStats}.
 *
 * @author Pete Gillin
 */
@NullUnmarked
class StatsTesting {
  // TODO(cpovirk): Convince myself that this larger error makes sense.
  static final double ALLOWED_ERROR = isAndroid() ? .25 : 1e-10;

  // Inputs and their statistics:

  static final double ONE_VALUE = 12.34;

  static final double OTHER_ONE_VALUE = -56.78;

       * more information, see the comments in that class.
       *
       * We already know that that's how it behaves, and subclasses of Converter can't change that
       * behavior. So there's no sense in making all subclass authors exclude the method from any
       * NullPointerTester tests that they have.
       */
      ignoredMembers.add(Converter.class.getMethod("apply", Object.class));

 * supported. Null keys and values are supported.
 *
 * <p>{@code containsKey(k)}, {@code put(k, v)} and {@code remove(k)} are all (expected and
 * amortized) constant time operations. Expected in the hashtable sense (depends on the hash
 * function doing a good job of distributing the elements to the buckets to a distribution not far
 * from uniform), and amortized since some operations can trigger a hash table resize.
 *

   * no service under management. Listeners would never fire because the ServiceManager was healthy
   * and stopped at the same time. This test ensures that listeners fire and isHealthy makes sense.
   */
  public void testEmptyServiceManager() {
    Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(ServiceManager.class.getName());
    logger.setLevel(Level.FINEST);
    TestLogHandler logHandler = new TestLogHandler();

       * more information, see the comments in that class.
       *
       * We already know that that's how it behaves, and subclasses of Converter can't change that
       * behavior. So there's no sense in making all subclass authors exclude the method from any
       * NullPointerTester tests that they have.
       */
      ignoredMembers.add(Converter.class.getMethod("apply", Object.class));

 * supported. The elements can be any objects.
 *
 * <p>{@code contains(x)}, {@code add(x)} and {@code remove(x)}, are all (expected and amortized)
 * constant time operations. Expected in the hashtable sense (depends on the hash function doing a
 * good job of distributing the elements to the buckets to a distribution not far from uniform), and
 * amortized since some operations can trigger a hash table resize.
 *

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable;

/**
 * A comparator, with additional methods to support common operations. This is an "enriched" version
 * of {@code Comparator} for pre-Java-8 users, in the same sense that {@link FluentIterable} is an
 * enriched {@link Iterable} for pre-Java-8 users.
 *
 * <h3>Three types of methods</h3>
 *
 * Like other fluent types, there are three types of methods present: methods for <i>acquiring</i>,

 * supported. Null keys and values are supported.
 *
 * <p>{@code containsKey(k)}, {@code put(k, v)} and {@code remove(k)} are all (expected and
 * amortized) constant time operations. Expected in the hashtable sense (depends on the hash
 * function doing a good job of distributing the elements to the buckets to a distribution not far
 * from uniform), and amortized since some operations can trigger a hash table resize.
 *