true":"false")+'"><div class="modal-header"><a href="#" class="close" data-dismiss="modal">&times;</a><h3>Pick a Time</h3></div><div class="modal-content">'+f+'</div><div class="modal-footer"><a href="#" class="btn btn-primary" data-dismiss="modal">OK</a></div></div>';break;case"dropdown":a='<div class="bootstrap-timepicker-widget dropdown-menu">'+f+"</div>"}return a},getTime:function(){return""===this.hour?"":this.hour+":"+(1===this.minute.toString().length?"0"+this.minute:this.minute)+(this.sh...

    /*
     * These methods "should" call checkNotNull. However, I'm wary of accidentally introducing
     * anything that might slow down execution on such a hot path. Given that the methods are only
     * package-private, I feel OK with just not testing them for NPE.
     *
     * Note that testing casValue is particularly dangerous because it uses Unsafe under some

         * only way to get a TypeVariable instance for the resolved types is to create our own. The
         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We
         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new

                    if (Constants.TRUE.equalsIgnoreCase(infoMap.get(Constants.CRAWLER_STATUS))) {
                        postcard.setStatus(Constants.OK);
                    } else {
                        postcard.setStatus(Constants.FAIL);
                    }
                    postcard.setJobname(systemProperties.getProperty("job.runtime.name", StringUtil.EMPTY));

labels.joblog_button_back=返回
labels.joblog_button_delete=刪除
labels.joblog_configuration=作業日誌
labels.joblog_endTime=結束時間
labels.joblog_jobName=名稱
labels.joblog_jobStatus=狀態
labels.joblog_status_ok=OK
labels.joblog_status_fail=失敗
labels.joblog_status_running=執行中
labels.joblog_link_details=詳細資訊
labels.joblog_link_list=列表
labels.joblog_scriptData=腳本
labels.joblog_scriptResult=結果
labels.joblog_scriptType=執行方法

            Response
              .Builder()
              .request(chain!!.request())
              .protocol(Protocol.HTTP_1_1)
              .code(200)
              .message("OK")
              .body("a".toResponseBody(null))
              .build()
          },
        ).build()
    val call = client.newCall(Request.Builder().url(server.url("/")).build())

	// Hex constant 0xFFFFFFFE00010001
	ADD $-8589869055, R5            // 3fe0fffe63ff00017bff83e463ff00017cbf2a14 or 0602000138a50001

	//TODO: this compiles to add r5,r6,r0. It should be addi r5,r6,0.
	//      this is OK since r0 == $0, but the latter is preferred.
	ADD $0, R6, R5             	// 7ca60214

        //TODO: the assembler rewrites these into ADDIS $19, R5, Rx and ADD $-10617, Rx, Rx, but the test only sees the first ADDIS

    for (int64_t i = 0; i < src.NumElements(); ++i) {
      src.flat<tstring>()(i) = data[i];
    }
    TF_Tensor* dst = TF_TensorFromTensor(src, &status);
    ASSERT_TRUE(status.ok()) << status.message();

    // Convert back to a C++ Tensor and ensure we get expected output.
    Tensor output;
    ASSERT_EQ(absl::OkStatus(), TF_TensorToTensor(dst, &output)) << line;

			readers = append(readers, NewDummyDataGen(p, cumulativeSum))
			cumulativeSum += p
		}

		refReader := io.LimitReader(ioutilx.NewSkipReader(io.MultiReader(readers...), off), length)
		if ok, msg := cmpReaders(refReader, rec.Body); !ok {
			t.Fatalf("(%s) Object: %s Case %d ByteRange: %s --> data mismatch! (msg: %s)", instanceType, oi.objectName, i+1, byteRange, msg)
		}
	}

     * value in the map is the number of occurrences of the key.
     */
    SortedMap<Integer, AtomicInteger> replica = Maps.newTreeMap();
    assertTrue("Empty heap should be OK", mmHeap.isIntact());
    for (int i = 0; i < heapSize; i++) {
      int randomInt = random.nextInt();
      mmHeap.offer(randomInt);
      insertIntoReplica(replica, randomInt);
    }
    assertIntact(mmHeap);