/** The key of the configuration. e.g. url */
    String INDEX_FIELD_URL = "index.field.url";

    /** The key of the configuration. e.g. doc_id */
    String INDEX_FIELD_doc_id = "index.field.doc_id";

    /** The key of the configuration. e.g. _id */
    String INDEX_FIELD_ID = "index.field.id";

    /** The key of the configuration. e.g. _version */

    /** Mapping type for array fields. */
    public static final String MAPPING_TYPE_ARRAY = "array";

    /** Mapping type for string fields. */
    public static final String MAPPING_TYPE_STRING = "string";

    /** Mapping type for long fields. */
    public static final String MAPPING_TYPE_LONG = "long";

    /** Mapping type for double fields. */

    fields `username` and `password`.

    All the initialization parameters are extracted from the request.

    The only difference between `OAuth2PasswordRequestFormStrict` and
    `OAuth2PasswordRequestForm` is that `OAuth2PasswordRequestFormStrict` requires the
    client to send the form field `grant_type` with the value `"password"`, which

    extends AggregateFuture<V, C> {
  /*
   * We access this field racily but safely. For discussion of a similar situation, see the comments
   * on the fields of TimeoutFuture. This field is slightly different from the fields discussed
   * there: cancel() never reads this field, only writes to it. That makes the race here completely
   * harmless, rather than just 99.99% harmless.
   */

        }

        // Helper methods to access private fields using reflection
        protected void setFieldValue(String fieldName, Object value) {
            try {
                Field field = null;
                Class<?> clazz = this.getClass();
                while (clazz != null && field == null) {
                    try {
                        field = clazz.getDeclaredField(fieldName);

    extends AggregateFuture<V, C> {
  /*
   * We access this field racily but safely. For discussion of a similar situation, see the comments
   * on the fields of TimeoutFuture. This field is slightly different from the fields discussed
   * there: cancel() never reads this field, only writes to it. That makes the race here completely
   * harmless, rather than just 99.99% harmless.
   */

                try {
                    suggester.settings().array().add(SuggestSettings.DefaultKeys.SUPPORTED_FIELDS, field);
                } catch (final SuggestSettingsException e) {
                    logger.warn("Failed to add suggest field: field={}", field, e);
                }
            }));

        final String[] fields = getParamValueArray(request, "facet.field");
        final String[] queries = getParamValueArray(request, "facet.query");
        if (fields.length == 0 && queries.length == 0) {
            return null;
        }
        final FacetInfo facetInfo = new FacetInfo();
        facetInfo.field = fields;
        facetInfo.query = queries;

    return set(re.findall("{(.*?)}", path))


_invalid_args_message = (
    "Invalid args for response field! Hint: "
    "check that {type_} is a valid Pydantic field type. "
    "If you are using a return type annotation that is not a valid Pydantic "
    "field (e.g. Union[Response, dict, None]) you can disable generating the "
    "response model from the type annotation with the path operation decorator "

		},
		// Test case - 3.
		// Test case with missing fields.
		// A valid authorization string should have 3 fields.
		{
			inputV4AuthStr:    signV4Algorithm,
			expectedAuthField: signValues{},
			expectedErrCode:   ErrMissingFields,
		},
		// Test case - 4.
		// Test case with invalid credential field.
		{
			inputV4AuthStr:    signV4Algorithm + " Cred=,a,b",