*       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

You can use the same builtin types as generics (with square brackets and types inside):

* `list`
* `tuple`
* `set`
* `dict`

#### List { #list }

For example, let's define a variable to be a `list` of `str`.

Declare the variable, with the same colon (`:`) syntax.

As the type, put `list`.

As the list is a type that contains some internal types, you put them in square brackets:

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

# variables in it, OR may be left empty if the user has already exported the
# relevant variables in their environment. Because of 'set -o allexport' above
# (which is equivalent to "set -a"), every variable in the file is exported
# for other files to use.
#
# Separately, if TFCI is set *and* there are also additional TFCI_ variables

   * add the suppression to the whole method (which turns off checking for a large section of code),
   * or extract a variable, and put the suppression on that. However, a local variable typically
   * doesn't work: Because nullness analyses typically infer the nullness of local variables,
   * there's no way to assign a {@code @Nullable T} to a field {@code T foo;} and instruct the

   * add the suppression to the whole method (which turns off checking for a large section of code),
   * or extract a variable, and put the suppression on that. However, a local variable typically
   * doesn't work: Because nullness analyses typically infer the nullness of local variables,
   * there's no way to assign a {@code @Nullable T} to a field {@code T foo;} and instruct the

            // Expected due to missing dependencies in test environment
            assertTrue(true);
            return;
        }
        // assertEquals(0, result.size()); // Commented out due to variable scope
    }

    @Test
    public void test_getBoostedDocumentList_withVirtualHost() {
        KeyMatch keyMatch = new KeyMatch();
        keyMatch.setId("km1");
        keyMatch.setTerm("java");

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code