...Although if the whole application is just **crashing immediately** it probably doesn't make sense to keep restarting it forever. But in those cases, you will probably notice it during development, or at least right after deployment.

So let's focus on the main cases, where it could crash entirely in some particular cases **in the future**, and it still makes sense to restart it.

///

If you have a big application, you might end up accumulating **several tags**, and you would want to make sure you always use the **same tag** for related *path operations*.

In these cases, it could make sense to store the tags in an `Enum`.

**FastAPI** supports that the same way as with plain strings:

{* ../../docs_src/path_operation_configuration/tutorial002b.py hl[1,8:10,13,18] *}

They work the same way as for other FastAPI endpoints/*path operations*:

{* ../../docs_src/websockets/tutorial002_an_py310.py hl[68:69,82] *}

/// info

As this is a WebSocket it doesn't really make sense to raise an `HTTPException`, instead we raise a `WebSocketException`.

### Burger Conclusion { #burger-conclusion }

In this scenario of "fast food burgers with your crush", as there is a lot of waiting 🕙, it makes a lot more sense to have a concurrent system ⏸🔀⏯.

This is the case for most of the web applications.

Many, many users, but your server is waiting 🕙 for their not-so-good connection to send their requests.

* Generate <a href="https://json-schema.org" class="external-link" target="_blank">JSON Schema</a> definitions for your model, you can also use them anywhere else you like if it makes sense for your project.
* Those schemas will be part of the generated OpenAPI schema, and used by the automatic documentation <abbr title="User Interfaces">UIs</abbr>.

## Automatic docs { #automatic-docs }

            if (response != null) {
                response.clearReceived();
            }

            // try TreeConnectAndX with the request
            // this does not make any sense if we are disconnecting right now
            T chainedResponse = null;
            if (!(request instanceof SmbComTreeDisconnect) && !(request instanceof Smb2TreeDisconnectRequest)) {

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

And if there's any other style or consistency need, I'll ask directly for that, or I'll add commits on top with the needed changes.

### Check the code { #check-the-code }

* Check and read the code, see if it makes sense, **run it locally** and see if it actually solves the problem.

* Then **comment** saying that you did that, that's how I will know you really checked it.

/// info

              <groupId>com.toasttab.android</groupId>
              <artifactId>gummy-bears-api-23</artifactId>
              <version>0.12.0</version>
              <!-- TODO(cpovirk): In principle, it would make sense to *also* test compatibility with JDK 1.8, since guava-android also has JRE users. -->
            </signature>
            <ignores>
              <!-- Unsafe isn't part of the documented Android API, but it is available.

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our