*
 * <p><a id="iteration"></a>
 *
 * <p><b>Key-grouped iteration.</b> All view collections follow the same iteration order. In all
 * current implementations, the iteration order always keeps multiple entries with the same key
 * together. Any creation method that would customarily respect insertion order (such as {@link
 * #copyOf(Multimap)}) instead preserves key-grouped order by inserting entries for an existing key

If you generate a client for a FastAPI app using tags, it will normally also separate the client code based on the tags.

This way, you will be able to have things ordered and grouped correctly for the client code:

<img src="/img/tutorial/generate-clients/image06.png">

In this case, you have:

* `ItemsService`
* `UsersService`

### Client Method Names { #client-method-names }

    public String ldapAccountFilter;

    /**
     * LDAP filter for finding groups.
     * Defines the search filter used to locate groups in LDAP.
     */
    @Size(max = 1000)
    public String ldapGroupFilter;

    /**
     * LDAP attribute name for group membership.
     * Specifies which LDAP attribute contains group membership information.
     */
    @Size(max = 100)

Syntax      = { Production } .
Production  = production_name "=" [ Expression ] "." .
Expression  = Term { "|" Term } .
Term        = Factor { Factor } .
Factor      = production_name | token [ "…" token ] | Group | Option | Repetition .
Group       = "(" Expression ")" .
Option      = "[" Expression "]" .
Repetition  = "{" Expression "}" .
</pre>

<p>
Productions are expressions constructed from terms and the following

## Dépendances pour des groupes de *chemins d'accès* { #dependencies-for-groups-of-path-operations }

on GitHub for insight into recent issues and development progress.

If you experience any snags when using TF 2.0, please let us know at the
[TF 2.0 Testing User Group](https://groups.google.com/a/tensorflow.org/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!forum/testing).
We have a support mailing list as well as weekly testing meetings, and would
love to hear your migration feedback and questions.

				</configuration>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>com.mycila</groupId>
				<artifactId>license-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>net.revelc.code.formatter</groupId>
				<artifactId>formatter-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
		</plugins>
	</build>
	<dependencies>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>org.codelibs.fess</groupId>
			<artifactId>fess-crawler</artifactId>

				</configuration>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>com.mycila</groupId>
				<artifactId>license-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>net.revelc.code.formatter</groupId>
				<artifactId>formatter-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
		</plugins>
	</build>
	<dependencies>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>org.codelibs.fess</groupId>
			<artifactId>fess-crawler</artifactId>

	</repositories>
	<dependencies>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>com.ibm.icu</groupId>
			<artifactId>icu4j</artifactId>
			<version>${icu4j.version}</version>
		</dependency>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>org.codelibs</groupId>
			<artifactId>corelib</artifactId>
			<version>${corelib.version}</version>
		</dependency>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>org.opensearch</groupId>
			<artifactId>opensearch</artifactId>

				</configuration>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>com.mycila</groupId>
				<artifactId>license-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
			<plugin>
				<groupId>net.revelc.code.formatter</groupId>
				<artifactId>formatter-maven-plugin</artifactId>
			</plugin>
		</plugins>
	</build>
	<dependencies>
		<dependency>
			<groupId>org.codelibs</groupId>
			<artifactId>corelib</artifactId>