t.Errorf("Test %d: %s: Expected to pass, but failed with: <ERROR> %s.", i+1, instanceType, actualErr.Error())
		}
		if actualErr == nil && !testCase.shouldPass {
			t.Errorf("Test %d: %s: Expected to fail with <ERROR> \"%s\", but passed instead.", i+1, instanceType, testCase.expectedError.Error())
		}
		// Failed as expected, but does it fail for the expected reason.
		if actualErr != nil && !testCase.shouldPass {

			if err != nil && testCase.shouldPass {
				t.Errorf("Test %d: %s:  Expected to pass, but failed with: <ERROR> %s", i+1, instanceType, err.Error())
			}
			if err == nil && !testCase.shouldPass {
				t.Errorf("Test %d: %s: Expected to fail with <ERROR> \"%s\", but passed instead", i+1, instanceType, testCase.err.Error())
			}
			// Failed as expected, but does it fail for the expected reason.
			if err != nil && !testCase.shouldPass {

	if res.Nickname != user.Name {
		t.Errorf("Expected res.Nickname to be %s, but got %s", user.Name, res.Nickname)
	}
	if res.Name != "" {
		t.Errorf("Expected res.Name to be empty, but got %s", res.Name)
	}
	if res.Age != user.Age {
		t.Errorf("Expected res.Age to be %d, but got %d", user.Age, res.Age)
	}
}

func TestPluckWithSelect(t *testing.T) {
	users := []User{

 * entries may be counted in {@link Cache#size}, but will never be visible to read or write
 * operations.
 *
 * <p>Certain cache configurations will result in the accrual of periodic maintenance tasks which
 * will be performed during write operations, or during occasional read operations in the absence of
 * writes. The {@link Cache#cleanUp} method of the returned cache will also perform maintenance, but

   * a hotspot optimizer bug, which should be fixed, but that's a separate, big project).
   *
   * The coding pattern above is heavily used in java.util, e.g. in ArrayList. There is a
   * RangeCheckMicroBenchmark in the JDK that was used to test this.
   *
   * But the methods in this class want to throw different exceptions, depending on the args, so it

	evt := evts[0]
	if evt.Action != TransitionAction {
		t.Fatalf("Expected action: %s but got %s", TransitionAction, evt.Action)
	}
	if evt.StorageClass != "TIER-1" {
		t.Fatalf("Expected TIER-1 but got %s", evt.StorageClass)
	}

	evt = evts[1]
	if evt.Action != TransitionVersionAction {
		t.Fatalf("Expected action: %s but got %s", TransitionVersionAction, evt.Action)
	}
	if evt.StorageClass != "TIER-2" {

   * a hotspot optimizer bug, which should be fixed, but that's a separate, big project).
   *
   * The coding pattern above is heavily used in java.util, e.g. in ArrayList. There is a
   * RangeCheckMicroBenchmark in the JDK that was used to test this.
   *
   * But the methods in this class want to throw different exceptions, depending on the args, so it

                            errOn30,
                            Version.V20,
                            "profiles.profile.id",
                            null,
                            "must be unique but found duplicate profile with id " + profile.getId(),
                            profile);
                }

                validate30RawProfileActivation(problems, profile.getActivation(), prefix);

 * entries may be counted in {@link Cache#size}, but will never be visible to read or write
 * operations.
 *
 * <p>Certain cache configurations will result in the accrual of periodic maintenance tasks which
 * will be performed during write operations, or during occasional read operations in the absence of
 * writes. The {@link Cache#cleanUp} method of the returned cache will also perform maintenance, but

    pings, but it did not track whether the reply pongs were received. With this
    update OkHttp requires that every ping receive a response: if it does not
    the connection will be closed and the listener's `onFailure()` method will
    be called.

    Web sockets have always been had pings, but pings on HTTP/2 connections is