Motivation:
The expression "not is success" can mean that either the future failed, or it has not yet completed.
However, many places where such an expression is used is expecting the future to have completed.
Specifically, they are expecting to be able to call `cause()` on the future.
It is both more correct, and semantically clearer, to call `isFailed()` instead of `!isSuccess()`.
Modification:
Change all places that used `!isSuccess()` to mean that the future had failed, to use `isFailed()`.
A few places are relying on `isSuccess()` returning `false` for _incomplete_ futures, and these places have been left unchanged.
Result:
Clearer code, with potentially fewer latent bugs.
edf4e28afa