* and allowing callers to pass arguments that a nullness checker believes could be null.
   *
   * We still encourage people to use requireNonNull over checkNotNull for non-precondition checks.
   */

  /**
   * Ensures that an object reference passed as a parameter to the calling method is not null.
   *
   * @param reference an object reference

   * and allowing callers to pass arguments that a nullness checker believes could be null.
   *
   * We still encourage people to use requireNonNull over checkNotNull for non-precondition checks.
   */

  /**
   * Ensures that an object reference passed as a parameter to the calling method is not null.
   *
   * @param reference an object reference

   * IllegalArgumentException} if passed a {@code fromKey} less than an earlier {@code fromKey}.
   * However, this method doesn't throw an exception in that situation, but instead keeps the
   * original {@code fromKey}. Similarly, this method keeps the original {@code toKey}, instead of
   * throwing an exception, if passed a {@code toKey} greater than an earlier {@code toKey}.
   */
  @Override

     *
     * <p>Canceling this future will attempt to cancel all the component futures.
     *
     * @return a future whose result is based on {@code combiner} (or based on the input futures
     *     passed to {@code whenAllSucceed}, if that is the method you used to create this {@code
     *     FutureCombiner}). Even if you don't care about the value of the future, you should

   * IllegalArgumentException} if passed a {@code fromKey} less than an earlier {@code fromKey}.
   * However, this method doesn't throw an exception in that situation, but instead keeps the
   * original {@code fromKey}. Similarly, this method keeps the original {@code toKey}, instead of
   * throwing an exception, if passed a {@code toKey} greater than an earlier {@code toKey}.
   */
  @Override

		if actualErr != nil && testCase.shouldPass {
			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())
		}

   * @Nullable X>, then users might pass a TypeParameter<Y>, where Y is a subtype of X, while still
   * passing a TypeToken<X>. This would be invalid. Maybe we could accept a TypeParameter<@PolyNull
   * X> if we support such a thing? It would be weird or misleading for users to be able to pass
   * `new TypeParameter<@Nullable T>() {}` and have it act as a plain `TypeParameter<T>`, but

//
// Conventions:
// * We use the prefix TF_ for everything in the API.
// * Objects are always passed around as pointers to opaque structs
//   and these structs are allocated/deallocated via the API.
// * TF_Status holds error information.  It is an object type
//   and therefore is passed around as a pointer to an opaque
//   struct as mentioned above.
// * Every call that has a TF_Status* argument clears it on success

			}
			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.

            String passwd = cliRequest.commandLine.getOptionValue(CLIManager.ENCRYPT_PASSWORD);

            if (passwd == null) {
                Console cons = System.console();
                char[] password = (cons == null) ? null : cons.readPassword("Password: ");
                if (password != null) {
                    // Cipher uses Strings
                    passwd = String.copyValueOf(password);