### Check the docs UI

But here's the fun part. ✨

The "official" way to access the app would be through the proxy with the path prefix that we defined. So, as we would expect, if you try the docs UI served by Uvicorn directly, without the path prefix in the URL, it won't work, because it expects to be accessed through the proxy.

                                throw new UnknownHostException( name.name );
                            }
                            if( response.received && response.resultCode == 0 ) {

/* Before we return, in anticipation of this address being cached we must
 * augment the addresses name's hashCode to distinguish those resolved by
 * Lmhosts, WINS, or BCAST. Otherwise a failed query from say WINS would

		logger.CriticalIf(context.Background(), Errorf("The seal algorithm '%s' is invalid for SSE-S3", sealedKey.Algorithm))
	}

	// There are two possibilities:
	// - We use a KMS -> There must be non-empty key ID and a KMS data key.
	// - We use a K/V -> There must be no key ID and no KMS data key.
	// Otherwise, the caller has passed an invalid argument combination.
	if keyID == "" && len(kmsKey) != 0 {

// /var/run/netns/<name>. However, this pattern is not ubiquitous. Some platforms bind mount to other places. As we run
// in a pod, we cannot just access any arbitrary file they happen to bind mount in, as we don't know ahead of time where
// it might be.
//
// Instead, we rely directly on the procfs.
// This rules out two possible methods:

        if ( dgst != null && !isAsync() && ( getConfig().isRequireSecureNegotiate() || getErrorCode() == NtStatus.NT_STATUS_OK ) ) {
            // TODO: SMB2 - do we need to check the MIDs?
            // We only read what we were waiting for, so first guess would be no.
            boolean verify = dgst.verify(buffer, i, size, 0, this);
            this.verifyFailed = verify;
            return !verify;
        }
        return true;
    }

     */
    if (throwable instanceof Error) {
      /*
       * TODO(cpovirk): Do we really want to log this if we called setException(throwable) and it
       * returned true? This was intentional (CL 46470009), but it seems odd compared to how we
       * normally handle Error.
       *
       * Similarly, do we really want to log the same Error more than once?
       */
      log(throwable);
    }
  }

        just a feature that seems like a sensible addition to Guava?


        Before new features get added to Guava, we really want to be sure that it's for a use case
        that actually comes up in the real world. We want to hear the real-world use case so the
        community can discuss and debate whether this feature is actually the *best* way to address

    // Fail fast on a null. We throw NPE here because the contract of Executor states that it throws
    // NPE on null listener, so we propagate that contract up into the add method as well.
    checkNotNull(runnable, "Runnable was null.");
    checkNotNull(executor, "Executor was null.");

    // Lock while we check state. We must maintain the lock while adding the new pair so that

        /*
         * We don't *need* to use reflection to access Optional: It's available on all JDKs we
         * support, and Android code won't get this far, anyway, because ProcessHandle is
         * unavailable. But given how much other reflection we're using, we might as well use it
         * here, too, so that we don't need to also suppress an AndroidApiChecker error.
         */

The application-layer can also do blocking reads. If the application asks to read and there's nothing available, we need to hold that thread until either the bytes arrive, the stream is closed, or a timeout elapses. If we get bytes but there's nobody asking for them, we buffer them. We don't consider bytes as delivered for flow control until they're consumed by the application.