*/
    String getLastaDiSmartDeployMode();

    /**
     * Get the value for the key 'development.here'. <br>
     * The value is, e.g. true <br>
     * comment: Is development environment here? (used for various purpose, you should set false if unknown)
     * @return The value of found property. (NotNull: if not found, exception but basically no way)
     */

		t.Errorf("Expected to get Author content %v but got: %v", NewPost.Author.Content, hnPost.Author.Content)
	}

	if hnPost.Author.ContentPtr != nil {
		t.Errorf("Expected to get nil Author contentPtr but got: %v", hnPost.Author.ContentPtr)
	}

	if NewPost.Author.Birthday.UnixMilli() != hnPost.Author.Birthday.UnixMilli() {
		t.Errorf("Expected to get Author birthday with %+v but got: %+v", NewPost.Author.Birthday, hnPost.Author.Birthday)

		if rec.Code != testCase.expectedRespStatus {
			t.Errorf("Test %d: %s: Expected the response status to be `%d`, but instead found `%d`", i+1, instanceType, testCase.expectedRespStatus, rec.Code)
		}
		if !bytes.Equal(testCase.locationResponse, rec.Body.Bytes()) && testCase.shouldPass {
			t.Errorf("Test %d: %s: Expected the response to be `%s`, but instead found `%s`", i+1, instanceType, string(testCase.locationResponse), rec.Body.String())
		}

   * a hotspot optimizer bug, which should be fixed, but that's a separate, big project).
   *
   * The coding pattern above is heavily used in java.util, e.g. in ArrayList. There is a
   * RangeCheckMicroBenchmark in the JDK that was used to test this.
   *
   * But the methods in this class want to throw different exceptions, depending on the args, so it

	}

	if err := DB.Model(&User{}).Select("name, sum(age) as total").Where("name LIKE ?", "groupby%").Group("name").Having("name = ?", "groupby1").Row().Scan(&name, &total); err != nil {
		t.Errorf("no error should happen, but got %v", err)
	}

	if name != "groupby1" || total != 660 {
		t.Errorf("name should be groupby, but got %v, total should be 660, but got %v", name, total)

		t.Fatalf("No error should raise, but got %v", err)
	}

	if err = tx.First(&User{}, "name = ?", "transaction").Error; err != nil {
		t.Fatalf("Should find saved record, but got %v", err)
	}

	user1 := *GetUser("transaction1-1", Config{})

	if err = tx.Save(&user1).Error; err != nil {
		t.Fatalf("No error should raise, but got %v", err)
	}

    void testBuilderCommon() {
        List<String> msgs = new ArrayList<>();
        msgs.add("*****************************************************************");
        msgs.add("* Your build is requesting parallel execution, but project      *");
        msgs.add("* contains the following plugin(s) that have goals not marked   *");
        msgs.add("* as @threadSafe to support parallel building.                  *");

	if err := DB.Create(&yasuo).Error; err != nil {
		t.Fatalf("should be able to create data, but got %v", err)
	}

	if yasuo.ID == "" {
		t.Fatal("should be able to has ID, but got zero value")
	}

	var result Yasuo
	if err := DB.First(&result, "id = ?", yasuo.ID).Error; err != nil || yasuo.Name != "jinzhu" {
		t.Errorf("No error should happen, but got %v", err)
	}

				gotErr := err.(BatchJobYamlErr)
				testErr := test.err.(BatchJobYamlErr)
				if gotErr.message() != testErr.message() {
					t.Fatalf("Expected %v but got %v", test.err, err)
				}
			}
			if err == nil && test.err != nil {
				t.Fatalf("Expected %v but got nil", test.err)
			}
		})
	}

  // could find them in the code review archives), but here are a few:
  //
  // 1. What about leaving/unlocking? Are you going to do
  //    guard.enter() paired with monitor.leave()? That might get
  //    confusing. It's nice for the finally block to look as close as
  //    possible to the thing right before the try. You could have
  //    guard.leave(), but that's a little odd as well because the