testCases := []struct {
		objectName string
		sipHash    int
	}{
		// cases which should pass the test.
		// passing in valid object name.
		{"object", 37},
		{"The Shining Script <v1>.pdf", 38},
		{"Cost Benefit Analysis (2009-2010).pptx", 59},
		{"117Gn8rfHL2ACARPAhaFd0AGzic9pUbIA/5OCn5A", 35},
		{"SHØRT", 49},
		{"There are far too many object names, and far too few bucket names!", 8},
		{"a/b/c/", 159},
		{"/a/b/c", 96},

       - The compressed index.xml file contains a timestamp property which
       changes with every test execution, such that running the test
       actually changes the test classpath itself. This means that it
       can"t benefit from incremental build acceleration, because on every
       execution it sees that the classpath has changed, and so to be
       safe, it needs to re-run.

   * @param offset the offset into the array at which to start
   * @return the value found in the array in the form of a long
   */
  static int load32(byte[] source, int offset) {
    // TODO(user): Measure the benefit of delegating this to LittleEndianBytes also.
    return (source[offset] & 0xFF)
        | ((source[offset + 1] & 0xFF) << 8)
        | ((source[offset + 2] & 0xFF) << 16)
        | ((source[offset + 3] & 0xFF) << 24);

/**
 * A future that, if it fails, may <i>optionally</i> provide access to the cause of the failure.
 *
 * <p>This class is used only for micro-optimization. Standard {@code Future} utilities benefit from
 * this optimization, so there is no need to specialize methods to return or accept this type
 * instead of {@code ListenableFuture}.
 *
 * <p>This class is GWT-compatible.
 *

        - label: "Does this affect error handling?"
        - label: "Is this about generics?"
        - label: "Is this change backward compatible? Breaking the Go 1 compatibility guarantee is a large cost and requires a large benefit"

  - type: textarea
    id: related-proposals
    attributes:
      label: Has this idea, or one like it, been proposed before?
      description: If so, how does this proposal differ?
      placeholder: |

<!--- The issue this PR addresses -->
<!-- Fixes #? -->

### Context
<!--- Why do you believe many users will benefit from this change? -->
<!--- Link to relevant issues or forum discussions here -->

### Contributor Checklist
- [ ] [Review Contribution Guidelines](https://github.com/gradle/gradle/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md).

   *
   * <p>The constructed {@code BloomFilter} will be serializable if the provided {@code Funnel<T>}
   * is.
   *
   * <p>It is recommended that the funnel be implemented as a Java enum. This has the benefit of
   * ensuring proper serialization and deserialization, which is important since {@link #equals}
   * also relies on object identity of funnels.
   *

You are encouraged to [write tests](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/tutorial/testing/) for your application and update your FastAPI version frequently after ensuring that your tests are passing. This way you will benefit from the latest features, bug fixes, and **security fixes**.

You can learn more about [FastAPI versions and how to pin and upgrade them](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/deployment/versions/) for your project in the docs.

   * types (or if the type is a non-variable type, like {@code String}), then code should almost
   * never use this method, preferring instead to call {@code requireNonNull} so as to benefit from
   * its runtime check.
   *
   * <p>An example use case for this method is in implementing an {@code Iterator<T>} whose {@code

 * certificate.
 *
 * Use of the chain cleaner is necessary to omit unexpected certificates that aren't relevant to
 * the TLS handshake and to extract the trusted CA certificate for the benefit of certificate
 * pinning.
 */
abstract class CertificateChainCleaner {
  @Throws(SSLPeerUnverifiedException::class)
  abstract fun clean(
    chain: List<Certificate>,
    hostname: String,
  ): List<Certificate>