* to be the case). Thus, this test is more of a regression test.
     *
     * Rough instructions to regenerate the test outputs and verify correctness:
     * - Temporarily change this test:
     * --- Comment out assertEquals.
     * --- System.out.println(input + " " + simplifyPath(input));
     * --- fail(). (If the test were to pass, its output would be hidden.)
     * - Run the test.

#### "Schéma" d'API

Ici, <a href="https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification" class="external-link" target="_blank">OpenAPI</a> est une spécification qui dicte comment définir le schéma de votre API.

Le schéma inclut les chemins de votre API, les paramètres potentiels de chaque chemin, etc.

#### "Schéma" de données

 * requirement that existing callers already fulfill).
 *
 * Disclaimer: Part of the reason that callers are so well adapted to `Function<A, B>` may be that
 * that is how the signature looked even prior to this comment! So naturally any change can break
 * existing users, but it can't *fix* existing users because any users who needed
 * `Function<@Nullable A, @Nullable B>` already had to find a workaround. Still, there is a *ton* of

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier