// Then - should be same instances
        assertSame(config1, config2, "Configuration should be consistent");
        assertSame(dfs1, dfs2, "DFS resolver should be consistent");
        assertSame(cache1, cache2, "Buffer cache should be consistent");
    }

    @Test
    @DisplayName("Context should provide working resource creation")

            assertSame(mockConfig, result, "getConfig() should return the expected configuration");
        }

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should maintain consistent getConfig return value")
        void shouldMaintainConsistentGetConfigReturn() {
            SmbSession mockSession = mock(SmbSession.class);
            Configuration mockConfig = mock(Configuration.class);

   * <p>The {@code hash} has the following properties:
   *
   * <ul>
   *   <li>It is <i>consistent</i>: for any reference {@code x}, multiple invocations of {@code
   *       hash(x}} consistently return the same value provided {@code x} remains unchanged
   *       according to the definition of the equivalence. The hash need not remain consistent from
   *       one execution of an application to another execution of the same application.

        assertSame(first, second);
        assertSame(invertibleCryptographer, first);
    }

    public void test_providePrimaryInvertibleCryptographer_consistency() {
        // Test multiple calls return consistent results
        for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
            InvertibleCryptographer cryptographer = securityResourceProvider.providePrimaryInvertibleCryptographer();
            assertNotNull(cryptographer);

            long timeSameLength = measureEqualsTime(auth3, auth4, TIMING_ITERATIONS);

            // Timing should be relatively consistent regardless of length differences
            double maxTime = Math.max(timeDiffLength, timeSameLength);
            double minTime = Math.min(timeDiffLength, timeSameLength);

then <i>A</i> is synchronized before <i>B</i>.
All the atomic operations executed in a program behave as though executed
in some sequentially consistent order.
</p>

<p>
The preceding definition has the same semantics as C++’s sequentially consistent atomics
and Java’s <code>volatile</code> variables.
</p>

<h3 id="finalizer">Finalizers</h3>

<p>

	var inconsistent int
	for i, meta := range metaArr {
		if disks[i] == nil {
			// Assuming offline drives as inconsistent,
			// to be safe and fallback to original
			// distribution order.
			inconsistent++
			continue
		}
		if !meta.IsValid() {
			inconsistent++
			continue
		}
		if meta.XLV1 != fi.XLV1 {
			inconsistent++
			continue
		}

   *
   * <p>This deliberately avoids all nameservice lookups (e.g. no DNS).
   *
   * <p>This method accepts non-ASCII digits, for example {@code "１９２.１６８.０.１"} (those are fullwidth
   * characters). That is consistent with {@link InetAddress}, but not with various RFCs. If you
   * want to accept ASCII digits only, you can use something like {@code
   * CharMatcher.ascii().matchesAllOf(ipString)}.
   *

  }

  /**
   * Creates a function that returns the same boolean output as the given predicate for all inputs.
   *
   * <p>The returned function is <i>consistent with equals</i> (as documented at {@link
   * Function#apply}) if and only if {@code predicate} is itself consistent with equals.
   *
   * <p>Prefer to use the method reference {@code predicate::test} instead. Note that it is not

        @Test
        @DisplayName("getOpnum should be consistent across multiple calls")
        void testGetOpnumConsistency() {
            // When
            int opnum1 = bind.getOpnum();
            int opnum2 = bind.getOpnum();
            int opnum3 = bind.getOpnum();

            // Then
            assertEquals(opnum1, opnum2, "Opnum should be consistent");