- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Optimization (provides speedup with no functional changes)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

## Checklist:
- [ ] Fixes a regression (If yes, please add `commit-id` or `PR #` here)
- [ ] Unit tests added/updated
- [ ] Internal documentation updated

        }

        final ExtractorFactory extractorFactory = crawlerContainer.getComponent("extractorFactory");
        if (extractorFactory == null) {
            throw new CrawlerSystemException("Could not find extractorFactory.");
        }
        final Extractor extractor = extractorFactory.getExtractor(responseData.getMimeType());
        final Map<String, String> params = new HashMap<>();

         * inserts checks automatically for non-private functions (which are the only kind that we
         * check).
         *
         * We *would* just check such functions redundantly, but kotlinc emits its nullness
         * annotations in the form of JetBrains annotations, which have only class retention and

        super("The POM expression: " + expression + " could not be evaluated. Reason: " + message, cause);

        this.expression = expression;
        this.originalMessage = message;
    }

    public ModelInterpolationException(String expression, String message) {
        super("The POM expression: " + expression + " could not be evaluated. Reason: " + message);

        this.expression = expression;

        // This test assumes that the AvPair constructor does NOT make a defensive copy of the raw array.
        // If a defensive copy were made, this test would fail, and the behavior would be more robust.
        // Given the current implementation, direct modification of the passed array affects the AvPair.
        // If this is not desired, a defensive copy should be added in the AvPair constructor.

        // Could trigger failover logic here
    }

    /**
     * Handle node available events
     */
    private void handleNodeAvailable(WitnessNotification notification) {
        log.info("Node available: {}", notification.getResourceName());
        // Node is back online - could rebalance connections
    }

    /**

     * </p>
     *
     * @param targetClass the target class (must not be {@literal null})
     * @return the class loader
     * @throws IllegalStateException if the class loader could not be obtained
     */
    public static ClassLoader getClassLoader(final Class<?> targetClass) {
        assertArgumentNotNull("targetClass", targetClass);

        stale-issue-message: "This issue has been marked as invalid question, please give more information by following the `Question` template, if you believe there is a bug of GORM, please create a pull request that could reproduce the issue on [https://github.com/go-gorm/playground](https://github.com/go-gorm/playground), the issue will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs. most likely your question already answered https://github.com/go-gorm/gorm/issues...

                        if (!file.exists()) {
                            if (!file.mkdirs()) {
                                throw new CrawlerSystemException("Could not create " + file.getAbsolutePath());
                            }
                            break;
                        }
                        if (file.isDirectory()) {
                            break;

        Additionally, it's very useful to us if you can provide a "straw API" — what the
        method signatures would look like, for example, even if the method and class names are still
        in flux. This can make the feature you're suggesting much clearer to us.

  - type: textarea
    attributes:
      label: (Optional) What would the method signatures for your feature look like?
      placeholder: |
        e.g.,