*
 * The last point is subtle. Often the observable object will be managing its own internal state
 * using a lock, however it is dangerous to dispatch listeners while holding a lock because they
 * might run on the {@code directExecutor()} or be otherwise re-entrant (call back into your
 * object). So it is important to not call {@link #dispatch} while holding any locks. This is why

package com.google.common.util.concurrent;

import static com.google.common.collect.Iterables.getOnlyElement;
import static com.google.common.truth.Truth.assertThat;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.directExecutor;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.invokeAnyImpl;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.listeningDecorator;

package com.google.common.util.concurrent;

import static com.google.common.collect.Iterables.getOnlyElement;
import static com.google.common.truth.Truth.assertThat;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.directExecutor;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.invokeAnyImpl;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.listeningDecorator;

 *
 * The last point is subtle. Often the observable object will be managing its own internal state
 * using a lock, however it is dangerous to dispatch listeners while holding a lock because they
 * might run on the {@code directExecutor()} or be otherwise re-entrant (call back into your
 * object). So it is important to not call {@link #dispatch} while holding any locks. This is why

    } finally {
      function = null;
    }

    /*
     * If set()/setValue() throws an Error, we let it propagate. Why? The most likely Error is a
     * StackOverflowError (from deep transform(..., directExecutor()) nesting), and calling
     * setException(stackOverflowError) would fail:
     *
     * - If the stack overflowed before set()/setValue() could even store the result in the output

    } finally {
      function = null;
    }

    /*
     * If set()/setValue() throws an Error, we let it propagate. Why? The most likely Error is a
     * StackOverflowError (from deep transform(..., directExecutor()) nesting), and calling
     * setException(stackOverflowError) would fail:
     *
     * - If the stack overflowed before set()/setValue() could even store the result in the output

import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Futures.immediateCancelledFuture;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Internal.toNanosSaturated;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.directExecutor;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Platform.restoreInterruptIfIsInterruptedException;
import static java.util.Objects.requireNonNull;
import static java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS;

   * @param executor the executor in which the listeners callback methods will be run. For fast,
   *     lightweight listeners that would be safe to execute in any thread, consider {@link
   *     MoreExecutors#directExecutor}.
   * @since 13.0
   */
  void addListener(Listener listener, Executor executor);

  /**
   * The lifecycle states of a service.
   *

   * @param executor the executor in which the listeners callback methods will be run. For fast,
   *     lightweight listeners that would be safe to execute in any thread, consider {@link
   *     MoreExecutors#directExecutor}.
   * @since 13.0
   */
  void addListener(Listener listener, Executor executor);

  /**
   * The lifecycle states of a service.
   *

import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Futures.immediateCancelledFuture;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Internal.toNanosSaturated;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.MoreExecutors.directExecutor;
import static com.google.common.util.concurrent.Platform.restoreInterruptIfIsInterruptedException;
import static java.util.Objects.requireNonNull;
import static java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS;