„_Wir haben zu **FastAPI** für unsere **APIs** gewechselt [...] Ich denke, es wird Ihnen gefallen [...]_“

And if there's any other style or consistency need, I'll ask directly for that, or I'll add commits on top with the needed changes.

### Check the code { #check-the-code }

* Check and read the code, see if it makes sense, **run it locally** and see if it actually solves the problem.

* Then **comment** saying that you did that, that's how I will know you really checked it.

/// info

              <groupId>com.toasttab.android</groupId>
              <artifactId>gummy-bears-api-23</artifactId>
              <version>0.12.0</version>
              <!-- TODO(cpovirk): In principle, it would make sense to *also* test compatibility with JDK 1.8, since guava-android also has JRE users. -->
            </signature>
            <ignores>
              <!-- Unsafe isn't part of the documented Android API, but it is available.

 * </ul>
 *
 * <h4>"Interfaces", not implementations</h4>
 *
 * <p>These are classes instead of interfaces to prevent external subtyping, but should be thought
 * of as interfaces in every important sense. Each public class such as {@link ImmutableSet} is a
 * <i>type</i> offering meaningful behavioral guarantees. This is substantially different from the

   * no service under management. Listeners would never fire because the ServiceManager was healthy
   * and stopped at the same time. This test ensures that listeners fire and isHealthy makes sense.
   */
  public void testEmptyServiceManager() {
    Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(ServiceManager.class.getName());
    logger.setLevel(Level.FINEST);
    TestLogHandler logHandler = new TestLogHandler();

* **Machine Learning**: Normalmente exige muita multiplicação de matrizes e vetores. Pense numa grande planilha com números e em multiplicar todos eles juntos e ao mesmo tempo.

       * more information, see the comments in that class.
       *
       * We already know that that's how it behaves, and subclasses of Converter can't change that
       * behavior. So there's no sense in making all subclass authors exclude the method from any
       * NullPointerTester tests that they have.
       */
      ignoredMembers.add(Converter.class.getMethod("apply", Object.class));

         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK
         * TypeVariable must have a different declaration or name. The only TypeVariable that our

// code point satisfying f(c), or -1 if none do.
func LastIndexFunc(s []byte, f func(r rune) bool) int {
	return lastIndexFunc(s, f, true)
}

// indexFunc is the same as IndexFunc except that if
// truth==false, the sense of the predicate function is
// inverted.
func indexFunc(s []byte, f func(r rune) bool, truth bool) int {
	start := 0
	for start < len(s) {
		r, wid := utf8.DecodeRune(s[start:])
		if f(r) == truth {

 * supported. Null keys and values are supported.
 *
 * <p>{@code containsKey(k)}, {@code put(k, v)} and {@code remove(k)} are all (expected and
 * amortized) constant time operations. Expected in the hashtable sense (depends on the hash
 * function doing a good job of distributing the elements to the buckets to a distribution not far
 * from uniform), and amortized since some operations can trigger a hash table resize.
 *