}

    @Test
    @DisplayName("Should return the credentials provided in the constructor")
    void testGetCredentials() {
        assertEquals(mockCredentials, wrapper.getCredentials(), "getCredentials should return the initially set credentials");
    }

    @Test

        @DisplayName("should validate supported model versions")
        void shouldValidateSupportedModelVersions(String version) {
            assertTrue(ModelVersionUtils.isValidModelVersion(version));
        }

        @ParameterizedTest
        @ValueSource(strings = {"3.0.0", "5.0.0", "2.0.0", "6.0.0"})
        @DisplayName("should reject unsupported model versions")

        assertNull(avPair3.getRaw(), "Raw data should be null if constructor argument was null.");
    }

    @Test
    void testConstants() {
        assertEquals(0x0, AvPair.MsvAvEOL, "MsvAvEOL constant should be 0x0.");
        assertEquals(0x6, AvPair.MsvAvFlags, "MsvAvFlags constant should be 0x6.");

        } else {
            fail("Inconsistent behavior: first=" + first + ", second=" + second);
        }

        // Third call should return the same cached Subject instance
        Subject third = auth.getSubject();
        assertEquals(second, third, "Subsequent calls should return same cached result");

        // Refresh should clear the cache
        auth.refresh();

is possible for a user to perform in the UI we need to know the URI that is to be used with its given parameters. That URI in turn must map internally to a method in a given component which belongs to a plugin. This mapping should actually be more generalized and it shouldn’t matter internally whether this maps to the core application or extension of the application in the form of plugins.

In the short term we are working with the model where the URI maps to a resource, and the resource...

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should construct with config only")
        void testConstructorWithConfig() {
            TestServerMessageBlock2Response resp = new TestServerMessageBlock2Response(mockConfig);
            assertNotNull(resp);
            assertSame(mockConfig, resp.getConfig());
        }

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should construct with config and command")

        assertArrayEquals(mechs, parsed.getMechanisms(), "Mechanism OIDs should round-trip");
        assertEquals(flags, parsed.getContextFlags(), "Flags should round-trip");
        assertArrayEquals(mechToken, parsed.getMechanismToken(), "Mechanism token should round-trip");
        assertArrayEquals(mic, parsed.getMechanismListMIC(), "MIC should round-trip");

        assertTrue(parsed.getContextFlag(NegTokenInit.DELEGATION));

        Boolean result = invokeIsValidVirtualHostPath("");
        assertTrue("Empty path should be valid (default host)", result);
    }

    @Test
    public void test_isValidVirtualHostPath_nullPath() throws Exception {
        setupVirtualHostHelper();

        Boolean result = invokeIsValidVirtualHostPath(null);
        assertTrue("Null path should be valid (default host)", result);
    }

    @Test

		t.Fatalf("value differs from expected")
	}
	if !ok {
		t.Fatalf("should be true")
	}

	if !lc.Contains("key1") {
		t.Fatalf("should contain key1")
	}
	if lc.Contains("key2") {
		t.Fatalf("should not contain key2")
	}

	v, ok = lc.Peek("key2")
	if v != "" {
		t.Fatalf("should be empty")
	}
	if ok {
		t.Fatalf("should be false")
	}

	if !reflect.DeepEqual(lc.Keys(), []string{"key1"}) {

                            null, "incomplete-project", null, "Should return null for missing groupId and version"),
                    Arguments.of("com.example", null, "1.0.0", "Should return null for missing artifactId"),
                    Arguments.of(null, null, "1.0.0", "Should return null for missing groupId and artifactId"),
                    Arguments.of("com.example", "test-project", null, "Should return null for missing version"),