public static class AzureAdUser implements FessUser {
        private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;

        /** User's group memberships. */
        protected String[] groups;

        /** User's role assignments. */
        protected String[] roles;

        /** User's computed permissions. */
        protected String[] permissions;

        /** Azure AD authentication result. */

            assertEquals((short) 0, unicodeString.maximum_length);
            assertNull(unicodeString.buffer);
        }

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should handle basic unicode string field assignments")
        void testUnicodeStringBasicFields() {
            // Given: A unicode string
            rpc.unicode_string unicodeString = new rpc.unicode_string();

            // When: Setting values

	}

	lang3 := Language{Code: "upsert", Name: "Upsert"}
	if err := gorm.G[Language](DB, clause.OnConflict{
		Columns:   []clause.Column{{Name: "code"}},
		DoUpdates: clause.Assignments(map[string]interface{}{"name": "upsert-new"}),
	}).Create(ctx, &lang3); err != nil {
		t.Fatalf("failed to upsert, got %v", err)
	}

    }

    // Test field assignment
    public void test_fieldAssignment() {
        String[] fields = new String[] { "field1", "field2", "field3" };
        facetInfo.field = fields;
        assertNotNull(facetInfo.field);
        assertEquals(3, facetInfo.field.length);
        assertSame(fields, facetInfo.field);
    }

    // Test size assignment
    public void test_sizeAssignment() {

        // Direct field assignment
        item.id = 999L;

        // Verify through getter
        assertEquals(999L, item.getId());

        // Verify direct field access
        assertEquals(999L, item.id);
    }

    public void test_sequentialIdAssignment() {
        // Test sequential ID assignment pattern
        TestDictionaryItem[] items = new TestDictionaryItem[5];

If it was in a type annotation we could have used the vertical bar, as:

```Python
some_variable: PlaneItem | CarItem
```

But if we put that in the assignment `response_model=PlaneItem | CarItem` we would get an error, because Python would try to perform an **invalid operation** between `PlaneItem` and `CarItem` instead of interpreting that as a type annotation.

          () -> {
            lock.lock();
            try {
              startUp();
              /*
               * requireNonNull is safe because executorService is never cleared after the
               * assignment above.
               */
              requireNonNull(executorService);
              runningTask = scheduler().schedule(delegate, executorService, task);
              notifyStarted();

          () -> {
            lock.lock();
            try {
              startUp();
              /*
               * requireNonNull is safe because executorService is never cleared after the
               * assignment above.
               */
              requireNonNull(executorService);
              runningTask = scheduler().schedule(delegate, executorService, task);
              notifyStarted();

	}

	// Remove the policy assignment on the user DN:

	if _, err = s.adm.DetachPolicyLDAP(ctx, userReq); err != nil {
		c.Fatalf("Unable to detach user policy: %v", err)
	}

	_, err = ldapID.Retrieve()
	if err == nil {
		c.Fatalf("Expected to fail to create a user with no associated policy!")
	}

	// Set policy via group and validate policy assignment.

- Fixed a bug in the exclusive assignment availability check for the `InPlacePodVerticalScalingExclusiveCPUs` feature gate. ([#130559](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/130559), [@esotsal](https://github.com/esotsal))