*       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

 *       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

 *       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

 *       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

Sie führen die Funktion ohne den benötigten Parameter aus, dann wird Ihr **Editor** Sie das mit einem Fehler wissen lassen, und **Python** wird sich auch beschweren.

Wenn Sie aber nicht `Annotated` benutzen und stattdessen die **(alte) Variante mit einem Defaultwert**, dann müssen Sie, wenn Sie die Funktion ohne FastAPI an **anderen Stellen** aufrufen, sich daran **erinnern**, die Argumente der Funktion zu übergeben, damit es richtig funktioniert. Ansonsten erhalten Sie unerwartete Werte...

So, if you have another file `importer.py` with:

```Python
from myapp import app

# Some more code
```

in that case, the automatically created variable inside of `myapp.py` will not have the variable `__name__` with a value of `"__main__"`.

So, the line:

```Python
    uvicorn.run(app, host="0.0.0.0", port=8000)
```

will not be executed.

/// info

#### Liste

Definieren wir zum Beispiel eine Variable, die eine `list` von `str` – eine Liste von Strings – sein soll.

//// tab | Python 3.9+

Deklarieren Sie die Variable mit der gleichen Doppelpunkt-Syntax (`:`).

Als Typ nehmen Sie `list`.