If we're building with JDK8, then clearly we're sticking to
                   JDK8 APIs. However, I assume (but did not confirm) that we'd
                   have the same issue with our -android builds, which need
                   animal-sniffer so that they can check that we're sticking to
                   JDK6-like APIs.

                   So instead, we use javac9, which doesn't lead to this error.

  @SuppressWarnings("ThreadPriorityCheck") // The cow told me to
  @Override
  public final void run() {
    /*
     * Set runner thread before checking isDone(). If we were to check isDone() first, the task
     * might be cancelled before we set the runner thread. That would make it impossible to
     * interrupt, yet it will still run, since interruptTask will leave the runner value null,
     * allowing the CAS below to succeed.

      } finally {
        monitor.leave();
      }
    } else {
      // It is possible due to races that we are currently in the expected state even though we
      // timed out. e.g. if we weren't event able to grab the lock within the timeout we would never
      // even check the guard. I don't think we care too much about this use case but it could lead
      // to a confusing error message.

   * cost as fresh ones (1/QPS is the cost for each). We use this trick later.
   *
   * If we pick a function that goes /below/ that horizontal line, it means that we reduce the area
   * of the function, thus time. Thus, the RateLimiter becomes /faster/ after a period of
   * underutilization. If, on the other hand, we pick a function that goes /above/ that horizontal

    lock.assertHeld()

    // If this connection is not accepting new exchanges, we're done.
    if (calls.size >= allocationLimit || noNewExchanges) return false

    // If the non-host fields of the address don't overlap, we're done.
    if (!this.route.address.equalsNonHost(address)) return false

    // If the host exactly matches, we're done: this connection can carry the address.

Let's continue from the previous example. We wanted to **annotate the function with one type** but return something that includes **more data**.

We want FastAPI to keep **filtering** the data using the response model.

In the previous example, because the classes were different, we had to use the `response_model` parameter. But that also means that we don't get the support from the editor and tools checking the function return type.

	if askDisks == -1 {
		newDisks := getQuorumDisks(disks, infos, (len(disks)+1)/2)
		if newDisks != nil {
			// If we found disks signature in quorum, we proceed to list
			// from a single drive, shuffling of the drives is subsequently.
			disks = newDisks
			askDisks = 1
		} else {
			// If we did not find suitable disks, perform strict quorum listing
			// as no disk agrees on quorum anymore.

                    } catch (ChecksumFailedException e) {
                        // if we catch a ChecksumFailedException, it means the transfer/read succeeded, but the
                        // checksum doesn't match. This could be a problem with the server (ibiblio HTTP-200 error
                        // page), so we'll try this up to two times. On the second try, we'll handle it as a bona-fide

// of the payload and verify that it matches the expected signature value.
//
// The last chunk is *always* 0-sized. So, we must only return io.EOF if we have encountered
// a chunk with a chunk size = 0. However, this chunk still has a signature and we must
// verify it.
const maxChunkSize = 16 << 20 // 16 MiB

// Read - implements `io.Reader`, which transparently decodes

	// so that no file modifications are missed while and after checking
	// note: we create a file watcher for each invocation, otherwise when we write to the directories
	// we would get infinite looping of events
	//
	// Additionally, fsnotify will lose existing watches on atomic copies (due to overwrite/rename),
	// so we have to re-watch after re-copy to make sure we always have fresh watches.
	watcher, err := util.CreateFileWatcher(targets...)