// It returns a [Writer] to which the file contents should be written.
// The file contents will be compressed using the [Deflate] method.
// The name must be a relative path: it must not start with a drive
// letter (e.g. C:) or leading slash, and only forward slashes are
// allowed. To create a directory instead of a file, add a trailing
// slash to the name. Duplicate names will not overwrite previous entries

  }

  /**
   * Returns a new builder with a hint for how many distinct keys are expected to be added. The
   * generated builder is equivalent to that returned by {@link #builder}, but may perform better if
   * {@code expectedKeys} is a good estimate.
   *
   * @throws IllegalArgumentException if {@code expectedKeys} is negative
   * @since 33.3.0
   */

    String message =
        String.format(
            Locale.ROOT,
            "Error in automated %s of %s\n"
                + "If the class is better tested explicitly, you can add %s() to %sTest",
            description,
            cls,
            explicitTestNames.get(0),
            cls.getName());
    return new AssertionError(message, e);
  }

   *     directly, or use a combination of {@link #throwIfUnchecked} and {@code throw new
   *     RuntimeException(e)}. But consider whether users would be better off if your API threw a
   *     different type of exception. For background on the deprecation, read <a
   *     href="https://github.com/google/guava/wiki/Why-we-deprecated-Throwables.propagate">Why we

 * </ul>
 *
 * Guava contains a number of other multimap implementations, such as {@link ArrayListMultimap}. In
 * new code, we recommend using {@link MultimapBuilder} instead: It provides better control of how
 * keys and values are stored.
 *
 * <h3>Other Notes</h3>
 *
 * <p>As with {@code Map}, the behavior of a {@code Multimap} is not specified if key objects

        assertEquals(100, referral.getSize());
        assertEquals(expectedPath, referral.getRpath());
        assertNull(referral.getAltPath());
        assertNull(referral.getNode());
    }

    // Getter Tests

    @Test
    public void testGetters() {
        // Setup a complete referral
        ByteBuffer bb = ByteBuffer.wrap(testBuffer).order(ByteOrder.LITTLE_ENDIAN);

        bb.putShort((short) 3);

            assertNotNull(closeResponse);
            assertNull(closeResponse.getFileId());
            assertNull(closeResponse.getFileName());
        }
    }

    @Nested
    @DisplayName("Getter Methods Tests")
    class GetterMethodsTests {

        @Test
        @DisplayName("getCloseFlags should return initial value of 0")
        void testGetCloseFlags() {

   *
   * <p>If {@code expectedSize} is exactly the number of elements added to the builder before {@link
   * Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized {@link
   * #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,
   * but not exactly, the number of elements added to the builder.

      if (newArg == null || Objects.equals(args.get(i), newArg)) {
        if (params.get(i).getType().getRawType().isEnum()) {
          continue; // Nothing better we can do if it's single-value enum
        }
        throw new ParameterHasNoDistinctValueException(params.get(i));
      }
      newArgs.set(i, newArg);
      tester.addEqualityGroup(createInstance(factory, newArgs));

### Конкурентность лучше параллелизма? { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

Нет! Мораль истории не в этом.