assertNotSame(item1.hashCode(), item4.hashCode());
    }

    @Test
    public void test_hashCode_withNullOutput() {
        // Test hashCode with null output - should not throw, returns consistent hash for null
        String[] inputs1 = { "a", "b" };
        String[] inputs2 = { "a", "b" };
        CharMappingItem item1 = new CharMappingItem(1L, inputs1, null);

 * <ul>
 *   <li>Preventing duplicate repositories that could cause confusion</li>
 *   <li>Rejecting null repository entries that would cause failures</li>
 *   <li>Maintaining consistent repository ordering for reproducible builds</li>
 * </ul>
 *
 * @since 4.0.0
 * @see RemoteRepository
 * @see Session#getRemoteRepositories()
 */
@Experimental
@Immutable

 * it easy to get sample values to use in such tests.
 *
 * This class is pretty fast and loose with default values: it attempts to provide values that are
 * well-formed, but doesn't guarantee values are internally consistent. Callers must take care to
 * configure the factory when sample values impact the correctness of the test.
 */
class TestValueFactory : Closeable {
  var taskFaker: TaskFaker = TaskFaker()

  /**
   * Returns an immutable map containing the same entries as {@code map}. If {@code map} somehow
   * contains entries with duplicate keys (for example, if it is a {@code SortedMap} whose
   * comparator is not <i>consistent with equals</i>), the results of this method are undefined.
   *
   * <p><b>Note:</b> Despite what the method name suggests, if {@code map} is an {@code
   * ImmutableClassToInstanceMap}, no copy will actually be performed.

   * not even implement {@link Comparable} at all).
   *
   * <p><b>Warning:</b> by definition, this comparator is not <i>consistent with equals</i> (as
   * defined {@linkplain Comparator here}). Avoid its use in APIs, such as {@link
   * TreeSet#TreeSet(Comparator)}, where such consistency is expected.
   *
   * <p>The returned comparator is serializable.
   *

    <!-- Checks that the order of modifiers conforms to the suggestions in the
    Java Language specification, sections 8.1.1, 8.3.1 and 8.4.3. It is not that
    the standard is perfect, but having a consistent order makes the code more
    readable and no other order is compellingly better than the standard.
    The correct order is:
            public
            protected
            private
            abstract

    }

    @Test
    void multipleStatsCallsTest() {
        logger.info("[BEGIN] multipleStatsCallsTest");

        // Call stats endpoint multiple times to ensure consistency
        final Map<String, Object> searchBody = new HashMap<>();

        String response1 = checkGetMethod(searchBody, "").asString();
        Integer status1 = JsonPath.from(response1).get("response.status");

</div>

With this feature from **Pydantic v2**, your API documentation is more **precise**, and if you have autogenerated clients and SDKs, they will be more precise too, with a better **developer experience** and consistency. 🎉

## Do not Separate Schemas { #do-not-separate-schemas }

Now, there are some cases where you might want to have the **same schema for input and output**.

    if (expectedSize < 3) {
      checkNonnegative(expectedSize, "expectedSize");
      return expectedSize + 1;
    }
    if (expectedSize < Ints.MAX_POWER_OF_TWO) {
      // This seems to be consistent across JDKs. The capacity argument to HashMap and LinkedHashMap
      // ends up being used to compute a "threshold" size, beyond which the internal table

    if (expectedSize < 3) {
      checkNonnegative(expectedSize, "expectedSize");
      return expectedSize + 1;
    }
    if (expectedSize < Ints.MAX_POWER_OF_TWO) {
      // This seems to be consistent across JDKs. The capacity argument to HashMap and LinkedHashMap
      // ends up being used to compute a "threshold" size, beyond which the internal table