#### 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
        that actually comes up in the real world. We want to hear the real-world use case so the

	wantException bool
}

func TestInternalDebug(t *testing.T) {
	cases := []execTestCase{
		{ // case 0, no args
			args:           []string{},
			noIstiod:       true,
			expectedOutput: "Error: debug type is required\n",
			wantException:  true,
		},
		{ // case 1, no istiod
			args:           []string{"adsz"},
			noIstiod:       true,

/**
 * Generated tests for {@link Monitor}.
 *
 * <p>This test class generates all of its own test cases in the {@link #suite()} method. Every
 * {@code enterXxx}, {@code tryEnterXxx}, and {@code waitForXxx} method of the {@code Monitor} class
 * is analyzed reflectively to determine appropriate test cases based on its signature. Additional
 * ad hoc test cases can be found in {@link SupplementalMonitorTest}.
 *
 * @author Justin T. Sampson
 */

/**
 * Generated tests for {@link Monitor}.
 *
 * <p>This test class generates all of its own test cases in the {@link #suite()} method. Every
 * {@code enterXxx}, {@code tryEnterXxx}, and {@code waitForXxx} method of the {@code Monitor} class
 * is analyzed reflectively to determine appropriate test cases based on its signature. Additional
 * ad hoc test cases can be found in {@link SupplementalMonitorTest}.
 *
 * @author Justin T. Sampson
 */

		expectedRespStatus   int
	}{
		// Test case - 1.
		// Case which valid inputs, expected to return success status of 200OK.
		{
			bucketName:           bucketName,
			accessKey:            credentials.AccessKey,
			secretKey:            credentials.SecretKey,
			expectedBucketPolicy: bucketPolicyTemplate,
			expectedRespStatus:   http.StatusOK,
		},
		// Test case - 2.
		// Case with non-existent bucket name.
		{

		},
		{
			version: versionInvalid2,
			errMsg:  fmt.Errorf("could not parse Malformed version: %v", versionInvalid2.GitVersion),
			isValid: false,
		},
	}
	for i, c := range cases {
		t.Run(fmt.Sprintf("case %d %s", i, c.version), func(t *testing.T) {
			got, err := extractKubernetesVersion(c.version)
			if c.errMsg != err && c.isValid {
				t.Fatalf("\nwanted: %v \nbut found: %v", c.errMsg, err)
			}

		},
		{
			description: "valid case - create full workload group with shortnames",
			args: strings.Split("group create --name foo -n bar -l app=foo,bar=baz -p grpc=3550,http=8080"+
				" -a annotation=foobar --serviceAccount test", " "),
			expectedException: false,
			expectedOutput:    customYAML,
		},
	}

	for i, c := range cases {
		t.Run(fmt.Sprintf("case %d %s", i, c.description), func(t *testing.T) {

Of course, there are some cases where there's no problem in running the previous steps multiple times, in that case, it's a lot easier to handle.

/// tip

Also, keep in mind that depending on your setup, in some cases you **might not even need any previous steps** before starting your application.

In that case, you wouldn't have to worry about any of this. 🤷

///

		}
	}
	// Success case, where path doesn't have any mounts.
	{
		absPaths := []string{"/path/to/x"}
		if err = checkCrossDevice(absPaths, mountsPath); err != nil {
			t.Fatalf("Expected success, failed instead (%s)", err)
		}
	}
}

// Tests cross device mount verification function, for both failure
// and success cases.
func TestCrossDeviceMount(t *testing.T) {

        that it's for a use case that actually comes up in the real world. We want to hear the
        real-world use case so the community can discuss and debate whether this feature is actually
        the *best* way to address the real use case, or whether or not a different approach might be
        more appropriate.


        It's okay if you can't provide complete context on a use case. We understand if you are not