Update IteratorTester example with a greater "steps" value

This allows IteratorTester to check the edge case that when an iterator has been exhausted (that is, "next" has been called repeatedly until "hasNext" returns false) then calling "next" on the iterator again exhibits the same behavior as the user's chosen "known good" reference implementation.

Fixes #5281

RELNOTES=n/a

-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=337541752

Author: jbduncan

android/guava-testlib/src/com/google/common/collect/testing/IteratorTester.java

@@ -50,6 +50,9 @@
  * verify() method, which is called <em>after</em> each sequence and is guaranteed to be called
  * using the latest values obtained from {@link IteratorTester#newTargetIterator()}.
  *
+ * <p>The value you pass to the parameter {@code steps} should be greater than the length of your
+ * iterator, so that this class can check that your iterator behaves correctly when it is exhausted.
+ *
  * <p>For example, to test {@link java.util.Collections#unmodifiableList(java.util.List)
  * Collections.unmodifiableList}'s iterator:
  *
@@ -61,7 +64,7 @@
  *         Arrays.asList("a", "b", "c", "d", "e"));
  * IteratorTester<String> iteratorTester =
  *     new IteratorTester<String>(
- *         5,
+ *         6,
  *         IteratorFeature.UNMODIFIABLE,
  *         expectedElements,
  *         IteratorTester.KnownOrder.KNOWN_ORDER) {
@@ -75,7 +78,7 @@
  * }</pre>
  *
  * <p><b>Note</b>: It is necessary to use {@code IteratorTester.KnownOrder} as shown above, rather
- * than {@code KnownOrder} directly, because otherwise the code is not compilable.
+ * than {@code KnownOrder} directly, because otherwise the code cannot be compiled.
  *
  * @author Kevin Bourrillion
  * @author Chris Povirk

guava-testlib/src/com/google/common/collect/testing/IteratorTester.java

@@ -50,6 +50,9 @@
  * verify() method, which is called <em>after</em> each sequence and is guaranteed to be called
  * using the latest values obtained from {@link IteratorTester#newTargetIterator()}.
  *
+ * <p>The value you pass to the parameter {@code steps} should be greater than the length of your
+ * iterator, so that this class can check that your iterator behaves correctly when it is exhausted.
+ *
  * <p>For example, to test {@link java.util.Collections#unmodifiableList(java.util.List)
  * Collections.unmodifiableList}'s iterator:
  *
@@ -61,7 +64,7 @@
  *         Arrays.asList("a", "b", "c", "d", "e"));
  * IteratorTester<String> iteratorTester =
  *     new IteratorTester<String>(
- *         5,
+ *         6,
  *         IteratorFeature.UNMODIFIABLE,
  *         expectedElements,
  *         IteratorTester.KnownOrder.KNOWN_ORDER) {
@@ -75,7 +78,7 @@
  * }</pre>
  *
  * <p><b>Note</b>: It is necessary to use {@code IteratorTester.KnownOrder} as shown above, rather
- * than {@code KnownOrder} directly, because otherwise the code is not compilable.
+ * than {@code KnownOrder} directly, because otherwise the code cannot be compiled.
  *
  * @author Kevin Bourrillion
  * @author Chris Povirk