*       expression involving {@code view} will throw)
   *   <li>{@code hashCode()} does not throw
   *   <li>if {@code node} is re-added to the network after having been removed, {@code view}'s
   *       behavior is undefined
   * </ul>
   *
   * @throws IllegalArgumentException if {@code node} is not an element of this network
   */
  Set<N> adjacentNodes(N node);

import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.ArgumentsProvider
import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.ArgumentsSource
import org.junit.jupiter.params.support.ParameterDeclarations

/**
 * This enforces us having the params classes on the classpath to workaround
 * https://github.com/graalvm/native-build-tools/issues/745
 */
class WithArgumentSourceTest {
  @ParameterizedTest
  @ArgumentsSource(FakeArgumentsProvider::class)

   * the result is chosen uniformly at random in [0, numBits), and then the result is chosen in that
   * range uniformly at random. Zero is treated as having log2 == 0.
   */
  static BigInteger randomNonNegativeBigInteger(int numBits) {
    int digits = RANDOM_SOURCE.nextInt(numBits);
    if (digits == 0) {
      return new BigInteger(1, RANDOM_SOURCE);
    } else {

    * If you are comparing Uvicorn, compare it against Daphne, Hypercorn, uWSGI, etc. Application servers.
* **Starlette**:
    * Will have the next best performance, after Uvicorn. In fact, Starlette uses Uvicorn to run. So, it probably can only get "slower" than Uvicorn by having to execute more code.

    assertEquals(Country.class, bimap.valueType());
  }

  public void testIterationOrder() {
    // The enum orderings are alphabetical, leading to the bimap and its inverse
    // having inconsistent iteration orderings.
    Map<Currency, Country> map =
        ImmutableMap.of(
            Currency.DOLLAR, Country.CANADA,
            Currency.PESO, Country.CHILE,

systems is data "<abbr title="also called marshalling, conversion">serialization</abbr>" which is taking data from the code (Python) and converting it into something that can be sent through the network. For example, converting an object containing data from a database into a JSON object. Converting `datetime` objects into strings, etc.

Another big feature needed by APIs is data validation, making sure that the data is valid, given certain parameters. For example, that some field is an `int`,...

	})
	return
}

// Having specify HAVING conditions for GROUP BY
//
//	// Select the sum age of users with name jinzhu
//	db.Model(&User{}).Select("name, sum(age) as total").Group("name").Having("name = ?", "jinzhu").Find(&result)
func (db *DB) Having(query interface{}, args ...interface{}) (tx *DB) {
	tx = db.getInstance()
	tx.Statement.AddClause(clause.GroupBy{
		Having: tx.Statement.BuildCondition(query, args...),

   * the result is chosen uniformly at random in [0, numBits), and then the result is chosen in that
   * range uniformly at random. Zero is treated as having log2 == 0.
   */
  static BigInteger randomNonNegativeBigInteger(int numBits) {
    int digits = RANDOM_SOURCE.nextInt(numBits);
    if (digits == 0) {
      return new BigInteger(1, RANDOM_SOURCE);
    } else {

<img src="/img/tutorial/dependencies/image02.png">

## Shortcut { #shortcut }

But you see that we are having some code repetition here, writing `CommonQueryParams` twice:

//// tab | Python 3.8+

```Python
commons: Annotated[CommonQueryParams, Depends(CommonQueryParams)]
```

////

## Parameterized dependencies { #parameterized-dependencies }

All the dependencies we have seen are a fixed function or class.

But there could be cases where you want to be able to set parameters on the dependency, without having to declare many different functions or classes.

Let's imagine that we want to have a dependency that checks if the query parameter `q` contains some fixed content.

But we want to be able to parameterize that fixed content.