you have any **mismatch** in the data used.

So, you would **detect many errors** very early in the development cycle instead of having to wait for the errors to show up to your final users in production and then trying to debug where the problem is. ✨...

### Types génériques avec des paramètres de types

Il existe certaines structures de données qui contiennent d'autres valeurs, comme `dict`, `list`, `set` et `tuple`. Et les valeurs internes peuvent elles aussi avoir leurs propres types.

Pour déclarer ces types et les types internes, on utilise le module standard de Python `typing`.

Il existe spécialement pour supporter ces annotations de types.

#### `List`

   * Use this for EXPLICIT tag types:
   *
   * ```
   * [5] EXPLICIT UTF8String
   * ```
   *
   * @param forceConstructed non-null to set the constructed bit to the specified value, even if the
   *     writing process sets something else. This is used to encode SEQUENCES in values that are
   *     declared to have non-constructed values, like OCTET STRING values.
   */

     */
    @Required
    public String url;

    /**
     * The name of the crawler thread that encountered the failure.
     * This is a required field used for identifying which crawler process failed.
     */
    @Required
    public String threadName;

    /**
     * The name or type of the error that occurred.
     * This field provides a categorization of the failure type.
     */

            final Class<?> implType = getClassForImplementationHint(type, configuration, loader);
            if (null == value && implType.isInterface() && configuration.getChildCount() == 0) {
                return null; // nothing to process
            }
            final Object bean = instantiateObject(implType);
            if (null == value) {
                processConfiguration(lookup, bean, loader, configuration, evaluator, listener);
            } else {

When you check the benchmarks, it is common to see several tools of different types compared as equivalent.

Specifically, to see Uvicorn, Starlette and FastAPI compared together (among many other tools).

The simpler the problem solved by the tool, the better performance it will get. And most of the benchmarks don't test the additional features provided by the tool.

The hierarchy is like:

* **Uvicorn**: an ASGI server

        @Override
        protected HashCode makeHash() {
          return HashCode.fromBytes(out.toByteArray());
        }

        @Override
        protected void process(ByteBuffer bb) {
          while (bb.hasRemaining()) {
            out.write(bb.get());
          }
        }

        @Override
        protected void processRemaining(ByteBuffer bb) {

	fi

	if ! pkill minio; then
		fail
	fi

	sleep 1
	if pgrep minio; then
		# forcibly killing, to proceed further properly.
		if ! pkill -9 minio; then
			echo "no minio process running anymore, proceed."
		fi
	fi
}

function fail() {
	for i in $(seq 1 3); do
		echo "server$i log:"
		cat "${WORK_DIR}/dist-minio-server$i.log"
	done
	echo "FAILED"
	purge "$WORK_DIR"
	exit 1

<font color="#4E9A06">INFO</font>:     Started reloader process [<font color="#34E2E2"><b>2265862</b></font>] using <font color="#34E2E2"><b>WatchFiles</b></font>
<font color="#4E9A06">INFO</font>:     Started server process [<font color="#06989A">2265873</font>]
<font color="#4E9A06">INFO</font>:     Waiting for application startup.

        annotations = new ArrayList<>();
        for (Annotation a : classOrMethod.getDeclaredAnnotations()) {
          /*
           * We avoid reflecting on NullMarked because its @Target(..., MODULE) causes problems
           * under JDK 8.
           */
          if (!(a instanceof NullMarked)
              && a.annotationType().isAnnotationPresent(TesterAnnotation.class)) {
            annotations.add(a);
          }