infoField.setAccessible(true);
        infoField.set(msrpcShareGetInfo, info502);

        // This should throw an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException when trying to read beyond array
        assertThrows(ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.class, () -> {
            msrpcShareGetInfo.getSecurity();
        });
    }

    @Test

          }
          oldHead = waitersField; // re-read and loop.
        } while (oldHead != Waiter.TOMBSTONE);
      }
      // re-read valueField, if we get here then we must have observed a TOMBSTONE while trying to
      // add a waiter.
      // requireNonNull is safe because valueField is always set before TOMBSTONE.
      return getDoneValue(requireNonNull(valueField));
    }

     */
    public static Path getEnvPath(final String envName, final String... names) {
        return getPath("WEB-INF/", "env/" + envName, names);
    }

    /**
     * Gets the path by trying multiple locations in order of preference.
     * First tries to get the real path from servlet context, then checks various
     * fallback locations including source and target directories.
     *

        void testReadDataWireFormatEmptyBuffer() {
            byte[] buffer = new byte[0];

            // Empty buffer causes ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException when trying to read
            assertThrows(ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.class, () -> {
                response.readDataWireFormat(buffer, 0, 0);
            });
        }

        @Test

        int offset = 10; // Only 10 bytes remaining, need 16
        SMBUtil.writeInt2(16, buffer, offset); // Write valid structure size

        // When & Then - Will throw SMBProtocolDecodingException when trying to read beyond buffer
        assertThrows(ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.class, () -> {
            response.readBytesWireFormat(buffer, offset);
        });
    }

client, it will error out if you have any **mismatch** in the data used.

So, you would **detect many errors** very early in the development cycle instead of having to wait for the errors to show up to your final users in production and then trying to debug where the problem is. ✨...

        // Configuration is accessed during initialization
        // Verify at least that getPid() and getTransactionBufferSize() were called
    }

    @DisplayName("Test FileInformation encode returning different sizes")
    @ParameterizedTest
    @ValueSource(ints = { 0, 1, 10, 100, 1000 })
    void testFileInformationEncodeDifferentSizes(int encodeSize) {

 *
 * @author Kevin Bourrillion
 * @since 11.0
 */
@Immutable
public interface HashFunction {
  /**
   * Begins a new hash code computation by returning an initialized, stateful {@code Hasher}
   * instance that is ready to receive data. Example:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * HashFunction hf = Hashing.md5();
   * HashCode hc = hf.newHasher()
   *     .putLong(id)

 *
 * @author Kevin Bourrillion
 * @since 11.0
 */
@Immutable
public interface HashFunction {
  /**
   * Begins a new hash code computation by returning an initialized, stateful {@code Hasher}
   * instance that is ready to receive data. Example:
   *
   * {@snippet :
   * HashFunction hf = Hashing.md5();
   * HashCode hc = hf.newHasher()
   *     .putLong(id)

And then it just returns a `dict` containing those values.

/// info

FastAPI added support for `Annotated` (and started recommending it) in version 0.95.0.

If you have an older version, you would get errors when trying to use `Annotated`.

Make sure you [Upgrade the FastAPI version](../../deployment/versions.md#upgrading-the-fastapi-versions){.internal-link target=_blank} to at least 0.95.1 before using `Annotated`.

///