* Make sure you have well defined Pydantic models for your request bodies and responses.
* Configure any required permissions and roles using dependencies.
* Never store plaintext passwords, only password hashes.
* Implement and use well-known cryptographic tools, like pwdlib and JWT tokens, etc.
* Add more granular permission controls with OAuth2 scopes where needed.
* ...etc.

package com.google.common.util.concurrent;

import com.google.common.annotations.GwtCompatible;
import java.util.concurrent.ScheduledFuture;
import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable;

/**
 * Helper interface to implement both {@link ListenableFuture} and {@link ScheduledFuture}.
 *
 * @author Anthony Zana
 * @since 15.0
 */
@GwtCompatible
public interface ListenableScheduledFuture<V extends @Nullable Object>

        key.encode(buffer, 2);

        for (int i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
            assertEquals(testBytes[i], buffer[i + 2]);
        }
    }

    @Test
    @DisplayName("Should implement equals correctly")
    void testEquals() {
        byte[] testBytes1 = new byte[] { 0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x05, 0x06, 0x07, 0x08, 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0B, 0x0C, 0x0D, 0x0E, 0x0F, 0x10 };

   *
   * <p>Although all tasks are immediately executed in the thread that submitted the task, this
   * {@code ExecutorService} imposes a small locking overhead on each task submission in order to
   * implement shutdown and termination behavior.
   *
   * <p>Because of the nature of single-thread execution, the methods {@code scheduleAtFixedRate}
   * and {@code scheduleWithFixedDelay} are not supported by this class and will throw an

name: Feature request
about: Suggest an idea
title: ''
labels: enhancement
assignees: ''

---

Start by telling us what problem you’re trying to solve. Often a solution already exists!

        assertNotSame(buffer1, buffer2, "Different calls should return different buffers initially");
    }

    @Test
    @DisplayName("releaseBuffer and getBuffer should implement buffer reuse")
    void testBufferReuse() {
        // Given
        byte[] originalBuffer = testCache.getBuffer();

        // When - release and get again
        testCache.releaseBuffer(originalBuffer);

import org.codelibs.fess.Constants;
import org.codelibs.fess.helper.SystemHelper;
import org.codelibs.fess.taglib.FessFunctions;
import org.codelibs.fess.util.ComponentUtil;

/**
 * Abstract base class for monitor targets that implement timeout functionality.
 */
public abstract class MonitorTarget implements TimeoutTarget {

    /**
     * Default constructor.
     */
    public MonitorTarget() {
        // Default constructor
    }

    * If you didn't use FastAPI and used Starlette directly (or another tool, like Sanic, Flask, Responder, etc) you would have to implement all the data validation and serialization yourself. So, your final application would still have the same overhead as if it was built using FastAPI. And in many cases, this data validation and serialization is the biggest amount of code written in...

 * {@link ValueGraph}, and {@link Network}):
 *
 * {@snippet :
 * someGraphAlgorithm(startNode, graph);
 * }
 *
 * This works because those types each implement {@code PredecessorsFunction}. It will also work
 * with any other implementation of this interface.
 *
 * <p>If you have your own graph implementation based around a custom node type {@code MyNode},

    // Provide two implementations: an anonymous class and a Mockito mock
    static Stream<Arguments> implementations() {
        SessionSetupHandler anon = new SessionSetupHandler() {
            // no methods to implement (marker interface)
        };
        SessionSetupHandler mock = mock(SessionSetupHandler.class);
        return Stream.of(Arguments.of(anon), Arguments.of(mock));
    }

    @Test