resetWithHole();
    assertEquals(c, navigableSet.higher(a));
    assertEquals(c, navigableSet.higher(b));
    assertEquals(null, navigableSet.higher(c));
  }

  /*
   * TODO(cpovirk): make "too small" and "too large" elements available for better navigation
   * testing. At that point, we may be able to eliminate the "hole" tests, which would mean that
   * ContiguousSet's tests would no longer need to suppress them.

            .suppressing(SetCreationTester.class.getMethods())
            // BiMap.entrySet() duplicate-handling behavior is too confusing for SetCreationTester
            .withSetUp(parentBuilder.getSetUp())
            .withTearDown(parentBuilder.getTearDown())
            .createTestSuite());
    /*
     * TODO(cpovirk): the Map tests duplicate most of this effort by using a

 *   <li>version circular dependencies</li>
 *   <li>missing artifacts</li>
 *   <li>network/transfer errors</li>
 *   <li>file system errors: permissions</li>
 * </ul>
 *
 * TODO carlos: all these possible has*Exceptions and get*Exceptions methods make the clients too
 *       complex requiring a long list of checks, need to create a parent/interface/encapsulation
 *       for the types of exceptions
 */
@Deprecated

    resetWithHole();
    assertEquals(c, navigableSet.higher(a));
    assertEquals(c, navigableSet.higher(b));
    assertEquals(null, navigableSet.higher(c));
  }

  /*
   * TODO(cpovirk): make "too small" and "too large" elements available for better navigation
   * testing. At that point, we may be able to eliminate the "hole" tests, which would mean that
   * ContiguousSet's tests would no longer need to suppress them.

    }

    public MojoDescriptor getMojo(String goal) {
        if (getMojos() == null) {
            return null; // no mojo in this POM
        }

        // TODO could we use a map? Maybe if the parent did that for components too, as this is too vulnerable to
        // changes above not being propagated to the map
        for (MojoDescriptor desc : getMojos()) {
            if (goal.equals(desc.getGoal())) {

Nesse caso, o caminho original `/app` seria servido em `/api/v1/app`.

Embora todo o seu código esteja escrito assumindo que existe apenas `/app`.

{* ../../docs_src/behind_a_proxy/tutorial001.py hl[6] *}

# Enable XLA support by default.
build --define=with_xla_support=true

# TODO(mihaimaruseac): Document this option or remove if no longer needed
build --config=short_logs

# TODO(mihaimaruseac): Document this option or remove if no longer needed
build --config=v2

# TF now has `cc_shared_library` targets, so it needs the experimental flag
# TODO(rostam): Remove when `cc_shared_library` is enabled by default

        artifact.addMetadata(metadata);
    }

    private ArtifactMetadata createMetadata(Artifact artifact) {
        Versioning versioning = new Versioning();
        // TODO Should this be changed for MNG-6754 too?
        versioning.updateTimestamp();
        versioning.addVersion(artifact.getVersion());

        if (artifact.isRelease()) {
            versioning.setRelease(artifact.getVersion());
        }

     * instance construction.
     *
     * @param session the Maven session
     * @throws MavenExecutionException in case of issue
     */
    // TODO This is too early for build extensions, so maybe just remove it?
    public void afterSessionStart(MavenSession session) throws MavenExecutionException {
        // do nothing
    }

    /**

   * <p><b>Performance note:</b> When feasible, {@code initialCapacity} should be the exact number
   * of values that will be added, if that knowledge is readily available. It is better to guess a
   * value slightly too high than slightly too low. If the value is not exact, the {@link
   * ImmutableLongArray} that is built will very likely occupy more memory than strictly necessary;
   * to trim memory usage, build using {@code builder.build().trimmed()}.