server = result.getServer();

                    if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
                        for (SettingsProblem problem : result.getProblems()) {
                            logger.debug(problem.getMessage(), problem.getException());
                        }
                    }

                StringBuilder message = new StringBuilder("In: " + pom + "\n\n");
                for (ModelProblem problem : modelBuildingException.getProblems()) {
                    message.append(problem).append("\n");
                }
                System.out.println(message);
                fail(message.toString());
            }

            throw e;
        }

            throws ArtifactResolutionException, ArtifactNotFoundException {
        ArtifactResolutionResult result = resolve(request);

        // We have collected all the problems so let's mimic the way the old code worked and just blow up right here.
        // That's right lets just let it rip right here and send a big incomprehensible blob of text at unsuspecting
        // users. Bad dog!

* Prüfen Sie, ob in der Übersetzung alles in Ordnung ist.
* Verbessern Sie bei Bedarf Ihren sprachsspezifischen Prompt, den allgemeinen Prompt oder das englische Dokument.
* Beheben Sie anschließend manuell die verbleibenden Probleme in der Übersetzung, sodass es eine gute Übersetzung ist.

Especificamente, observa-se Uvicorn, Starlette e FastAPI comparados juntos (entre muitas outras ferramentas).

Quanto mais simples o problema resolvido pela ferramenta, melhor a performance que ela terá. E a maioria dos _benchmarks_ não testam as características adicionais fornecidas pela ferramenta.

A hierarquia segue assim:

* **Uvicorn**: um servidor ASGI

   * A word about using {@link Equivalence}, which automatically checks for {@code null} and
   * identical inputs: This sounds like it ought to be a problem here, since the goals of this class
   * include testing that {@code equals()} is reflexive and is tolerant of {@code null}. However,
   * there's no problem. The reason: {@link EqualsTester} tests {@code null} and identical inputs
   * directly against {@code equals()} rather than through the {@code Equivalence}.

 * https://github.com/google/guava/releases/tag/v27.0) This means that the copy of ListenableFuture
 * in com.google.guava:guava differs from the "frozen" copy in the listenablefuture artifact. This
 * could in principle cause problems for some users. Still, we expect that the benefits of the
 * nullness annotations in particular will outweigh the costs. (And it's worth noting that we have

    }

    @Override
    public Optional<Long> sizeIfKnown() {
      if (!(sources instanceof Collection)) {
        // Infinite Iterables can cause problems here. Of course, it's true that most of the other
        // methods on this class also have potential problems with infinite  Iterables. But unlike
        // those, this method can cause issues even if the user is dealing with a (finite) slice()

     * @return The calculated checksums, indexed by algorithms, never {@code null}.
     * @throws NullPointerException if passed in any parameter is {@code null}.
     * @throws IOException In case of any IO problem.
     */
    @Nonnull
    Map<ChecksumAlgorithm, String> calculate(@Nonnull Path file, @Nonnull Collection<ChecksumAlgorithm> algorithms)
            throws IOException;

    /**

      // null?  no problem
    }

    public static void staticOneArgJsr305NullableCorrectlyDoesNotThrowNpe(
        @javax.annotation.Nullable String s) {
      // null?  no problem
    }

    public static void staticOneArgNullableCorrectlyDoesNotThrowNpe(@Nullable String s) {
      // null?  no problem
    }