* AggregateFutureState.
     *
     * Here, we check that we're able to force AbstractFutureState to select SynchronizedHelper, and
     * below, we actually run the AbstractFutureTest methods under that scenario.
     */
    checkHelperVersion(NO_ATOMIC_REFERENCE_FIELD_UPDATER, "SynchronizedHelper");

    // Then, run the actual tests under each alternative classloader:

    /*

        // Initial update - should mark as changed
        entry.updateChild(childName, 1024L, 1000L, false, 0x20, 500L, 800L);
        assertTrue(entry.hasChanges());

        // Clear changes to test next scenario
        entry.markComplete();
        assertFalse(entry.hasChanges());

        // Update with same values - should not mark as changed (no actual change)

        SmbRenewableCredentials impl = supplier.get();

        // Act: call renew
        CredentialsInternal renewed = impl.renew();

        // Assert: verify behavior based on scenario
        if (expectSame) {
            assertSame(impl, renewed, "renew() should return the same instance");
        } else if (expectNew) {
            assertNotNull(renewed, "renew() should return a new non-null instance");

        assertEquals(firstCall, secondCall);
        assertEquals(secondCall, thirdCall);
    }

    // Test with changing query string (though typically wouldn't change in real scenario)
    public void test_getServletPath_withChangingQueryString() {
        final String originalPath = "/original/path";
        final String customPath = "/api/v1/dynamic";
        mockRequest.setServletPath(originalPath);

OkHttpClient client = new OkHttpClient.Builder()
    .sslSocketFactory(clientCertificates.sslSocketFactory(), clientCertificates.trustManager())
    .build();
```

Client Authentication
---------------------

The above scenario is representative of most TLS set ups: the client uses certificates to validate
the identity of a server. The converse is also possible. Here we create a server that authenticates
a client and a client that authenticates a server.

Usando estas ideas, JWT puede ser utilizado para escenarios mucho más sofisticados.

En esos casos, varias de esas entidades podrían tener el mismo ID, digamos `foo` (un usuario `foo`, un coche `foo`, y un artículo del blog `foo`).

        assertEquals("custom_field", queryContext.getDefaultField());

        queryContext.setDefaultField(null);
        assertNull(queryContext.getDefaultField());
    }

    // Test complex scenario with multiple operations
    public void test_complexScenario() {
        getMockRequest().setAttribute(Constants.FIELD_LOGS, new HashMap<String, List<String>>());

        assertNotNull(retrieved);
        assertEquals(engine, retrieved);
    }

    // Test concurrent-like scenario (sequential but simulating concurrent behavior)
    public void test_add_multipleSameNameSequential() {
        TestScriptEngine engine1 = new TestScriptEngine("v1");
        TestScriptEngine engine2 = new TestScriptEngine("v2");

      required: false

  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        #### Ubiquity: provide concrete use cases


        Did you *actually* encounter the need for this feature in a real-world scenario, or is it
        just a feature that seems like a sensible addition to Guava?


        Before new features get added to Guava, we really want to be sure that it's for a use case

    validations:
      required: true

  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        Did you *actually* encounter the need for this enhancement in a real-world scenario, or does
        it just seem like a sensible behavior for the feature to have?


        Before we make significant changes to existing features in Guava, we really want to be sure