for (@SuppressWarnings("rawtypes") // class literals
    Class<? extends AbstractTester> testerClass : testers) {
      @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // getting rid of the raw type, for better or for worse
      TestSuite testerSuite =
          makeSuiteForTesterClass((Class<? extends AbstractTester<?>>) testerClass);
      if (testerSuite.countTestCases() > 0) {
        suite.addTest(testerSuite);
      }
    }

    /*
     * Any of the setException() calls below can fail if the output Future is cancelled between now
     * and then. This means that we're silently swallowing an exception -- maybe even an Error. But
     * this is no worse than what FutureTask does in that situation. Additionally, because the
     * Future was cancelled, its listeners have been run, so its consumers will not hang.
     *

    /*
     * Any of the setException() calls below can fail if the output Future is cancelled between now
     * and then. This means that we're silently swallowing an exception -- maybe even an Error. But
     * this is no worse than what FutureTask does in that situation. Additionally, because the
     * Future was cancelled, its listeners have been run, so its consumers will not hang.
     *

// guard against any command-line argument beginning with @,
// even things like "-I @foo".
// We use load.SafeArg (which is even more conservative)
// to reject these.
//
// Even worse, gcc -I@foo (one arg) turns into cc1 -I @foo (two args),
// so although gcc doesn't expand the @foo, cc1 will.
// So out of paranoia, we reject @ at the beginning of every
// flag argument that might be split into its own argument.

Der generierte Code enthält immer noch etwas **verdoppelte Information**.

Wir wissen bereits, dass diese Methode mit den **Items** zusammenhängt, da sich dieses Wort in `ItemsService` befindet (vom Tag übernommen), aber wir haben auch immer noch den Tagnamen im Methodennamen vorangestellt. 😕

      /*
       * Assume that equals uses the == optimization when appropriate, and that
       * it would check hash codes as an optimization when appropriate. If we
       * did these things, it would just make things worse for the most
       * performance-conscious users.
       */
      if (key.equals(candidateKey)) {
        return entry.getValue();
      }
    }
    return null;
  }

  @Override

	if oldHash == newHash {
		// Store the old entry in the new entry's overflow list, then store
		// the new entry.
		newEntry.overflow.Store(oldEntry)
		return &newEntry.node
	}
	// We have to add an indirect node. Worse still, we may need to add more than one.
	newIndirect := newIndirectNode(parent)
	top := newIndirect
	for {
		if hashShift == 0 {
			panic("internal/concurrent.HashMapTrie: ran out of hash bits while inserting")
		}

	// b) was force-deleted.
	//
	// It's now just waiting for garbage collection. We could wait
	// for it to actually get removed, but that may be blocked by
	// finalizers for the pod and thus get delayed.
	//
	// Worse, it is possible that there is a cyclic dependency
	// (pod finalizer waits for PVC to get removed, PVC protection
	// controller waits for pod to get removed).  By considering

		// panic supercedes the outer panic. Again, we end up needing to
		// walk the same stack frames.
		//
		// These are probably pretty rare occurrences in practice, and
		// they don't seem any worse than the existing logic. But if we
		// move the unwinding state into _panic, we could detect when we
		// run into where the last panic started, and then just pick up
		// where it left off instead.
		//

  // calls, but is less human reader friendly. People reading protobufs are less
  // frequent than serialization, so default to using tensor content
  // representation.
  // * For scalars and short strings it may be marginally worse and a more
  //   intelligent decision could be made by caller.
  if (use_tensor_content)
    input_tensor.AsProtoTensorContent(&tensor_proto);
  else
    input_tensor.AsProtoField(&tensor_proto);
  return tensor_proto;